Look Within, Or Perish Without

April 8, 2017

My friend Meghan Ward: Van Jones was amazing at City Arts and Lectures tonight. He spoke a lot about prison reform, he cried when talking about Prince and America’s opioid addiction problem, and he strongly urged liberals to quit whining about Trump and look within…”

A college professor, Susan Ito, replied: Um…. look within and then what?” #Confused.

Really confused! Lots of people are confused these days, by the simple proposition of introspection. This is 26 centuries after the Oracle Of Delphi’s Temple of Apollo fronticipe  was adorned with:”KNOW THYSELF!” The aphorism came from Luxor, in Egypt (Egypt founded, to a great extent, Greek civilization! Thus ours: the greater Indo-European area is actually one single civilization, for the last 12,000 years…)

Full inscriptions the details of what “Know Thyself” exactly meant were etched in stone thousands of years ago, and can still be read today, in the original stone.

Civilization rests on “Know Thyself”. Because all intellectuals, and even the scientists have to look inside themselves and ask how it is that they came to know what they believe they know.

Now, confused college professors don’t have a clue about what looking within brings.

But they teach. What do they teach? How can they teach when they miss the essential method enabling us to find out what we know? 


Look within and realize that most so-called “liberals” are everything but liberal. Look within and realize most self-described progressives and realize they are everything you can possibly imagine, but certainly not progressives. Look within and realize that so-called “philanthropists” are nothing but filthy plutocrats leading by the nose the so-called “democratic” party, which is nothing but their instrument of world domination, ever since president plutocrat FD Roosevelt ruled in the craftiest manner.

Look within and realize that nearly the entire media is owned and controlled propaganda by the world’s richest people, and that this propaganda enabled them to pay no taxes and disguise their influence.

An example: I talked recently to an extremely influential heir of an immense US fortune, in charge of energy policy. He informed me Trump did not have a brain. Indeed, as most plutocrats do, his influence goes through half a dozen tax-free institutions which feed professional “democrats”. Superficially, he poses as a “progressive”. During our trustful conversation, among people of wealth and taste, however, he turned out that all his positions are extremely hard-core extreme right, conservative, pro-inheritance, wealth oriented, and insisting that the poorest should work hard, even when they have not enough money to live (“to keep them motivated”… we thought about that, he added, “we” studied carefully). Although one of the US’s most prominent ecologists, he is against a carbon tax, even when confronted to explicit graphs… It goes without saying that he helps to inspire, if not control, several of the world’s most prestigious universities…

This sort of wealthy, endowed, privileged creatures rules the “democratic” party, pay the payrolls, in universities, media, companies and build the minds and hearts of the so-called “democrats”. So their victims, We The People, are enraged, and they vent their rage in the direction they have been told to, by those who control their minds, towards scapegoats known as the Republicans and Trump.

However, when the so-called “Democrats” were in total control (2009-2010), they did nothing more significant than lowering taxes on the hyper-rich and literally sending 8 trillion dollars to the richest US corporations. Apparently the immensely wealthy controllers of pseudo-democratic party thought they were not getting enough help under Bush. So they asked, and received, more than half the yearly GDP, thanks to that lanky, telegenic Kenyan boy…

Seriously abominable, not to say obaminable.

Delphi was closed by the order of the fascist Christian tyrant, Roman emperor, Theodosius in 385 CE. Because Christian fanatics didn’t want people to look within, and realize they believed in the madness their superiors had ordered them to believe in, so that said superiors could exploit them some more.

Look within, or regress. Indeed, civilization cannot stand still. Civilization uses the world, exhausts it. Civilization has to invent new tricks, never used before. Or it dies.  At that point, when death threatens, civilization has to ask itself how is it that it thinks it knows what it knows. Absent this, one falls in the backwardness of Christianism, Islam, or what Qin Shin Huang tried in China.

Beginning in 213 BC, at the instigation of his chancellor Li Si and to avoid scholars’ comparisons of his reign with the past, Qin Shi Huang ordered most existing books to be burned with the exception of those on astrology, agriculture, medicine, divination, and the history of the State of Qin. This would also serve the purpose of furthering the ongoing reformation of the writing system by removing examples of obsolete scripts (an ongoing preoccupation). Owning the Book of Songs or the Classic of History was to be punished especially severely. According to the Records of the Grand Historian, written a century later, the following year Qin Shi Huang had some 460 scholars buried alive for owning the forbidden books.

Li Si would organize a tricky coup after the death of Qin: he persuaded the chosen successor to commit suicide. However he was found out later, confessed under torture, and was then cut in half at the wait, a particularly terrible demise.

Tyrannies need people not to realize that all they know was taught by the tyrants, as if the people were dogs. Meanwhile, if civilization does not progress in mental sophistication, it becomes increasingly untenable, be it only from ecological devastation. Fortunately, at least in Occident, revolutions brought a new regime of thought.

But this is not guaranteed, as the Tasmanian Effect shows: a society can progressively forget basic know-how. In some conditions, societies or civilizations were unable to produce enough significant ideas, and, unable to support themselves anymore with the fire of innovation, they imploded, in many ways all too similar to those of old, bloated super red giant stars.

Look within, this is where the truth about truth is found.

Patrice Ayme’

Syria’s Assad Struck Because Pacifist Fundamentalism Leads To Horror

April 7, 2017

Good people will want to, have always wanted to, strike down Syria’s Assad and North Korea’s Kim. Pacifist fundamentalism is worse than an hypocrisy. It brings not just death, but the apocalypse (consider Nazism).

In August 2013, French pilots were in their seats in their fully armed planes, ready to strike Assad, when Obama lost his nerve, or got a call from one of his masters, decided to be worse than a hypocrite. Obama decided it was OK, after all, to use neurotoxic weapons such as Sarin to kill thousands, including children. Neurotoxic weapons against cities can only kill innocent people, such as children.

A Few Of The Hundreds Of Children Assassinated By Nerve Gas In 2013 By War Criminal and Criminal Against Humanity Assad. In Just One Single Attack In Damas (and there hundreds of such attacks). Unsure About Playing Knight In Shining Armor, Or Maybe Paid to Do So, Obama Lost His Nerve At The Last Minute. He Claimed To Stay Cool, Watching This, When He Had the Means to Punish It, and Thus Became A Smirking Accomplice of It. In A Way, It’s Worse Than What Happened In The Nazi Extermination Camps, Because We Had No Picture Of Exterminated Children!

By way of comparison with Assad and Obama, Adolf Hitler, not a humanitarian of renown, decided, in 1945 NOT to use neurotoxic weapons against his ferocious enemies, who were determined, and had declared officially, that they would not stop until they had annihilated Nazi Germany. Nazi stocks of gases such as Sarin were enough to kill dozens of millions, and the Nazi had the means to bring those gases over the targets (Western armies, London, Paris, etc.). In spite of the fact using the neurotoxins could have been imagined by the most crazed Nazis as a way to bring the war to a standstill, the Nazis did not consider using them.

The top Nazis knew all too well that the British, if no one else, would reply in kind. This sort of tit for tat had happened in 1940. The Nazis devastated Coventry. The Brits replied in kind, on a much greater scale. Rightly so.

This is why Hitler did not go fully neurotoxic in 1945.

Trump fired 59 cruise missiles at the Shariat Assad air base in Syria which fired the neurotoxins.


Barack Obama and the plutocrats in London (who are friends of Bachar El Assad) let humanity down in 2013. Civilization needs to be defended.

It’s telling that Trump, so vomited upon by the pseudo-progressives, is the one defending civilization, whereas their puppet president, who was the object of a cult by the plutocrats that be, did nothing which could upset the enemies of civilization, his, de facto, friends.  Trump’s action is an excellent message for all those who believe they can scare civilization into submission. An excellent way to set up the right context with President Xi of the People Republic of China, visiting the US president at Mar a Lago this weekend, reminding him that civilization without a great wall cannot be defended. But now civilization is one, and the great wall has to be in the minds.

There are great walls which cannot be crossed, because they ought not to be crossed, and the usage of weapons of mass destruction against civilian populations is one of them.

Patrice Ayme’

Running Out Of Oxygen: Culture of Greater Inquiry Vs Culture Of Greater Idiocy

April 5, 2017

We are living in the age of idiocy, we are also living in the age of the greatest smarts. It’s a tale of the two psychologies. If idiocy wins, we are doomed, if smarts win, intelligence will blossom in the galaxy.

It all depends upon having enough of a spirit of inquiry. And it’s literally a question of survival, not just honoring the human spirit.

Young and brash idiots, obsessed by power and money, that is, power and power, will scoff.  They will crow “multiculturalism” does it all. However, not all cultures are equally inclined to inquire. And not enough inquiring will smother us all:

No Spirit Of Inquiry, and Soon, No Breathing:

Climate destruction is extending far beyond the threat of melting polar ice caps — it’s threatening to smother us all.

Idiocy Will Smother Us All, Lest We Do Something About Idiocy. Decrease of Oxygen Content In Oceans During the Last 50 years.

A new study published in the science journal Nature in winter 2017 found that the ocean’s worldwide oxygen content has ALREADY declined by more than 2% between 1960 and 2010. Ooopss. Looks like even the idiots will run out of oxygen. This is what I called “Global Hypoxia”:


Scientists have warned about the ocean’s declining oxygen levels on marine life, and its resulting impact on humans. However the conventional prediction was 1% to 7% down by 2100 CE. Thus the present state of affairs turns out to be much worse than the conventional thinking had it. A study from the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel, Germany, by Sunke Schmidtko, Lothar Stramma and Martin Visbeck — considered data dating back to 1960, and compared with the situation in 2010.

Data on oxygen, temperature and other factors relating to the world’s oceans, enabled them to map the overall oxygen loss around the globe.

“We were able to document the oxygen distribution and its changes for the entire ocean for the first time. These numbers are an essential prerequisite for improving forecasts for the ocean of the future,” wrote Schmidtko.

2% may sound like only a small change, yet it doesn’t take much of a drop to change the state of oceans to something completely different. The only organism in the ocean that thrives with little-to-no oxygen is anaerobic bacteria (it’s back to three billion years ago!)

Just a little loss of oxygen in coastal waters can lead to a complete change in ecosystems — a small decrease in oxygen like this can transform from something desirable to very undesirable,” said Professor David Baker, at the University of Hong Kong’s Swire Institute of Marine Sciences.

Oxygen in the world’s oceans is not evenly distributed. 2% drop is just an average. In some parts of the world, there has been a much steeper decline of oxygen levels, bringing dead zones. In 50 years, the North Pacific lost the largest volume of oxygen. The largest percentage lost was in the Arctic Ocean.

“The oxygen losses in the ocean can have far-reaching consequences because of the uneven distribution. For fisheries and coastal economies this process may have detrimental consequences,” wrote Stramma. Yes, to say the least. Mass die-offs is already a fact.


Are people more or less inquisitive? Yes. Different cultures have different levels of tolerance for the spirit of inquiry, assuredly:

Cultures more or less revere inquiry. When a culture reveres inquiry, We The People naturally asks how come those who have power got it to start with. Thus any authoritarian, let alone fascist hereditary society, such as the Late Roman empire’s theocracy called “Catholic Orthodoxy”, will be leery to encourage inquiry. The Roman state of the Christian theocrats died of that. And so did all Muslim dynasties.

For example of how inquiry can get discouraged, in the Qur’an, god tells the Believers that there are questions they should not ask, because “god knows and you don’t”. Thus a good Muslim scholar should be careful before asking a question, whether that’s a question which can be asked, or one such that, by asking it, one displeases the divinity, which may then decide to skin them alive and regrow their skin to be able to flay them, again and again…

As a result, the Arabs transmitted knowledge rather than creatING it (quite a bit of “Muslim” culture was not Muslim at all, as the Muslim empire consisted in the beginning of more than 95% non-Muslims, for generations).

There is the secret of Europe’s world domination. Not trade, not colonialism, not gunboat diplomacy. Instead: a greater culture of inquiry. Observing a greater inclination to inquiry in the European tradition is not to crow that somehow “Europeans” are superior, but to crow that intellectual superiority is an acquired trait, part of culture, which one can inherit, non genetically.

A striking example is the case of Gerbert of Aurillac. There was the world’s top intellectual… and he became preceptor to the young emperor Otto II (who called him back when he was 16 years old, to come out of his “rusticity” of the Franks, by teaching him the “subtlety of the Greeks”).

And, later, Gerbert d’Aurillac became Pope, before being savagely interrupted by death. Pope! Elected Bishop of Rome, while having taught for decades that mathematics, physics and theology were… separate and equal. One can’t imagine any of this in Muslim lands. So why to insist Islam should be respected? Why should cultures antagonistic to inquiry be respected?

Patrice Ayme’

Science, Fruit, Tool and Motivation of Philosophy

April 3, 2017

Can philosophy exist on its own? The cognitively challenged think so. See the somewhat dim-witted “Philosophy Tool Kit” in Aeon, by what else, a professional philosopher, somebody taught precisely to teach that “Thinking like a philosopher need not be a strange and arcane art, if you get started with these tricks of the trade… At a time when we are bombarded more than ever with specious claims and spurious inferences, clear thinking provides a much-needed safeguard that we should all strive towards. Philosophers place a premium on certain tools for regimenting our thinking, especially logic and probability theory.

In other words, like everything else, for the dim-witted, philosophy is a trade. Being wise, the Promethean essence of human spirit, is brought down to recipes. Apparently to “regiment” our thinking we have to acknowledge that “trade“. Everything is a “trade“. And why do we “regiment”? Well, according to all too many people paid to propagandize the official version of philosophy, we are in an army, apparently, “regimented” in the triumphing army of trade. Wisdom is a military trade. (The afore quoted “philosopher” comes from Australia, a place which made lots of money with coal and iron sold to China.)

Well… Trade is not the essence of humanity, wisdom is. And wisdom rests on science, knowing what is true. Not what a trade our disciplined regiments are.

(The author in Aeon self-defines as an “analytic philosopher”. “Analytic philosophy” is a branch of philosophy so stupidly arrogant that it thinks nobody else is analytical. Analysis actually means “deconstruction”, something ironic as “analytic philosophers” tend to despise Derrida… Bertrand Russel is often viewed as the father of analytic philosophy, although he thought it was not an activity worth having…)

I don’t esteem Plato very much, but on this one he got it right. Modern philosophers tend to not know modern geometry, because they are lazy dogs.. They prefer to ponder the meaning of “the”…

Accordingly, Plato thought that the first trick, the first tool, the first requirement, of philosophy was to learn “geometry” (which was NON-Euclidean geometry at the time, thus not that simple!). Please remember that Plato was notoriously friendly to tyrants. However, even him did not think philosophy was a regimented trade!

Another interest is that, by being exposed to science and mathematics, the spirit and culture of inquiry, fundamental to the love of wisdom, can be encouraged. Such is the fundamental toolkit of the philosopher.


Most so-called philosophers praise themselves for superior thinking. However human species have unceasingly deliberately perfected what superior thinking is, and provides with, for millions of years. Superior thinking is not a static achievement, a book one can learn by rote. Superior thinking is what humanity does unceasingly more of.

Philo-Sophy, Loving Wisdom, is an abbreviation for the excellence which is truly meant. (Just as an electron is an abbreviation for what is truly meant; Dirac’s meaning of the electron as an abbreviation was different from that of his immediate predecessors.)

Everybody loves wisdom, even cats. Especially cats. But wisdom as cats tend to have it, is different from wisdom, as Homo Sapiens tend to have it.

What’s ought to be truly meant by “philosopher” is someone who loves superior wisdom more than any other love, and has actually achieved that superiority. Cats are not philosophers, because, given a chance, they would rather eat the bearer of superior wisdom (namely Homo Sapiens).

The notions of “philosopher” and the “philosophical method” are distinct. A genuine philosopher will practice the philosophical method, which consists into using whatever it takes to advance wisdom, even poetry and the vaguest analogies. And what is wisdom? Superior understanding of what makes the universe tick.

Thus a towering philosopher will have to be a scientist, mathematician and logician, as Plato felt, and as towering geniuses of the Middle Ages such as Abelard and Buridan were (Buridan proved Aristotle physics wrong, introducing the heliocentric system, most of “Newton’s” laws… and successfully tackled the problem of self-referential statements, circa 1350 CE, amidst plague and war).


The average persons feel that exhibiting tribal appurtenance is the highest form of wisdom, that make them no better than baboons (be they jihadist, attached to Islam, or physicists, anxious to exhibit their quirky love for the local sport team). That does not qualify them as philosophers, because our ancestral baboon equivalents have been doing this for 50 million years, there is nothing superior about it.


Part of wisdom is not to stay a prisoner of the vehicle used to convey it, be it a person, a language, a theory, a sentence or a word. The question is not what wisdom is, but what wisdom means: analyze not the words, but what they are supposed to mean. What the interlocutor meant, and that interlocutor could be nature itself.


Any logic L, and thus, in particular any wisdom W, is relative to a context. Giving a context to that context is going meta. Going meta is not in general unique, and it is always possible, and even easy: pick up an axiom, say A of L, and consider the meta logic made of the union of L and what you get by adjoining non-A to L. This is the scheme to get non-Euclidean geometry, or non-standard arithmetic, or non-standard analysis, or complex analysis from real analysis, or even finite fields.


Nature is a sadistic god. Why not? We know nature is a sadistic god, because we have wisdom. Hyenas don’t have that luxury, condemning what feeds them. Hyenas have to eat the genitals of the uncooperative buffalo first, as hyena heuristics show  that they are delicious, and their absorption diminishes the vigor of the prey. Occasionally, though, a lioness will have the wisdom to protect a young prey animal, as a pet.

Even lions know nature is a sadistic god. But only us can go industrial, building a better god. Hint: it’s not to be obtained by just focusing on the word “the”, and equally puny tricks (cockroaches know tricks too; they don’t belong to superior wisdom, because, however correct, they are too puny).

Human wisdom enables to provide us with the tools to build a less sadistic version of nature. Sadism where we want it. Not where “it” wants it…

Patrice Ayme’


EURO CHEAT: German Hidden Banks Subsidies Destroy Europe!

April 2, 2017

More generally, the collapse of the European economy is caused by too much economic “liberalism”, while the rest of the world does the opposite, by providing strategic state help. This dichotomy happens within the Euro zone itself, where Germany found a trick to provide stealthy government help.

Abstract: The collapse of industrial production in France, Italy and Spain, while it soared in Germany, under the Euro regime, has a simple technical explanation. Using bankrupt banks, Germany subsidizes massively its industry. However, under vicious European Union rules, Germany insists that countries other than Germany do not get any STATE subsidies… while Germany enjoys them quietly. This cannot be allowed to go on.

The existence of a, de facto, common currency is nothing new in Europe: it was practiced during most of the last 2,000 years. It is a drastic economic advantage. Thus, so it should be with the Euro. However the present unfair and imbalanced German practice is unsustainable. The solution is for the rest of Europe to get state help, just as Germany, Japan, China, the USA and the UK (massive quantitative easing and other interventions), and also India, do: extend state subsidies to non-German Euro nations. (Either by creating banks similar to the bankrupt state supported German banks, as used to exist in France, or by some other subsidies…)

Several facts can be observed: first that the fossil fuel countries, Canada, US, Australia, did pretty well, thanks to their smothering of the planet in compensation for them making lots of money (figuratively or not). Second, that the Euro has become a Germany-first, a über alles Germany device. As I explained, that’s caused by bankrupt banks, which can lend to small, crucial industries, while being fed by state subsidies…


French presidential elections are 3 weeks away. Marine Le Pen wants to leave the Euro, and the European Union (however, she also intent to change to a Swiss-like system of plebiscites, so she would submit any big change to these). Marine Le Pen was received both by Putin and the presidents of Chad and Lebanon.

Many opinion leaders have clamored for years to destroy the Euro, such as the well-known establishment propagandist Paul Krugman. Except for howling together, the reasoning is not obvious. The anti-Europeans’ basic argument is that various economies need to devalue their currencies at different rates, because otherwise they won’t change.

On this site Picard 578 and Lovell said:”The problem of the Euro is its existence”. I disagree: common currencies are very advantageous, but this one has a poisonous hook inside.


Past Currency Problems: Rome, China, Europe:

It is true that the gigantic Roman empire ran into a currency problem, characterized superficially both by dearth of fiduciary currency and inflation. One reason was the weakening of the application of Roman Civil law by centuries of fascism. Another is that, like China, the Romans did not have enough precious metals (anymore: they had exhausted the mines).

The Franks solved both problems: they yanked law enforcement from the Roman Catholic bishops, re-establishing good old fashion cruel punishments for malefactors: currency counterfeiters were slowly boiled to death, alive, in special long cages where they slowly cooking twitching bodies could contribute to leaving a lasting impression to the obtuse masses.

The other way the Franks solved the problem of precious metals was by conquering Eastern Europe, something the Romans (except for imperators Caesar and Trajan) had not even envisioned. There were abundant silver mines in Eastern Europe. (The Chinese solved, sort of, their currency problem with paper currency. That lasted seven centuries, until collapse of the Yuans under hyperinflation. The Ming and Manchus got Bolivian silver from Bolivia, through the Philippines held Spain.


Common European Currencies Never A Problem:

When there is no common currency, there is no common trade..Clearly common currency collapse contributed to the fall of the Rome of the Third and Fifth centuries, and the Roman Catholic bishop government of around 400 CE. The same holds for the Yuan. The Chinese used cumbersome copper as precious metal, or potentially worthless paper. When people cheated with currency in 400 CE Rome, the local bishop from the local plutocratic family, would admonish them. Six centuries later, the Franks had them bathe in boiling water, wine or oil.

Charlemagne was actually Roman EMPEROR. The currency system he refurbished had existed for 8 centuries and would exist for centuries more. Although various mints did various things, there was interoperability of the coins.

The Franks did re-establish the Roman currency, both by ferocious enforcement of the law, and by making the coins themselves more valuable (by augmenting their precious metal content).

From 650 CE to 1000 CE, temperature increases of the Middle Age Warming and the re-establishment of a stronger state (very strong in 800 CE, when the Roman empire was officially “renovated”, much more fragmented later in West Francia) brought more than a doubling of the population of Europe (from 18.5 million to 39 million). In spite of all the disturbances and massacres caused by invasions of rabid, voracious, pitiless Saracens, Vikings and Magyars.

Although West Francia (present day occidental two-thirds of France) was cut up in 60 local states (some duchies, some counties, some free cities, some church states), after the death of emperor Charles the Bald, counterfeiters were boiled all over, and thus (roughly) the same currency worked in northern Germany, Rome, or Austria.

I insist on this for good reason: the government of Roman bishops of 400 CE had decided, as the good Christians they were, not to apply the death penalty anymore for highwaymen. Result: the currency became extremely fake, and the road extremely unsafe. Too much goodness leads to too much crime for civilization to keep on operating. This is what the government of bishops of 400 CE proved (at the same time, realism forced the bishops to agree to let the Franks receive military control of three Roman provinces, including Gallia and Germania).

Charlemagne was Imperator Romanorum (Emperor of the Romans, approved by Constantinople, Oriental Rome). The Franks viewed Rome as “renovated”, but the fact is Roman civil law, Roman roads, and Roman currency had survived the collapse of the Roman state in the Fifth century (when it was progressively replaced by the imperators/elected kings of the Franks). The Belgian historian Pirenne suggested that it is the rise of the Muslim Caliphate which really caused a problem. That’s pretty much obvious as Islam was explicitly contrived to destroy the Greco-Roman state, promptly conquered more than half of it, by the sword, in 80 years, and then embargoed the rest!

In any case, the pure gold Roman Solidus was still used in 1000 CE, and the basic coin was still the Denarius (pfennig, penny, French “denier”). England, not yet part of the empire in 800 CE was still part of the currency system. Although England had 70 mints then, the English penny paid two-third of one basic worker’s day, same as on the other side of the Channel. As it took months to travel across Europe, the fact that there were many local mints does not mean that the (“Renovated”) Roman currency could not be viewed as global.

Charlemagne was the first Roman emperor who was officially sacred by the Pope. Hence the notion of “Holy” Roman empire, which surface several centuries later. By 1500, a common central European (Holy Roman-German currency) appeared: the Thaler (hence the word “Dollar”). The Thaler was used for nearly four centuries… until 1873, when Bismarck’s imperial maneuvering eradicated it…)

Europe had common currency before: the Thaler, covering Mittel Europa, lasted four centuries.

The Euro and EU intervention in economy is well beyond just having a common currency. For example it prevents to re-establish order in Africa, because France does that, France then gets punished for it in diverse ways, including by having not enough money for the rest of her economy. The proper usage would be to subtract France/Europe defense from deficit computations and, more generally, spending.

In particular money and plotting should have been spent as needed to establish a proper democracy and state backing it up, in Libya. Same for all subsahelian countries (Mali, Chad, etc.)


Germany Banking Subsidy Trick:

Thousands of medium German banks are crucial to finance the “middleling” German companies (of the “Mittelstand”) which produce crucial equipment for larger companies (say specialized brakes for fancy cars, or specialized LED lights used in characteristic German cars like my own). Such companies can then evolve and produce in a very protected, stable environment, favorable to apprenticeship.

It is a good system.

Too bad other countries are not allowed to have one too. To have one, other countries would have to massively invest, in full, enormous catastrophic deficit mode, before then going-on in a chronic deficit mode (as Germany presently does).

Weirdly, I am the only one to talk about this.

By the way, China’s local communities (sometimes cities with 25 million people…) do the same as Germany: massive deficit spending to sustain massive local industrialization. Right, the Chinese system is suffering from terminal debt. However, the fact is Chinese industry is thriving and expanding worldwide (Example: a Chinese drone company has a contract for taxi drones in Dubai, to operate in a few months…).

Meanwhile, French industry has collapsed, most governmental help being outlawed by European institutions (which did not discover the German trick therein described…) 

Thus General Electric, saved by 60 billion dollars from Obama, was able to swallow its French competitor, with Brussels’ benediction… That was helped by US “Justice” condemning said French competitor to a billion dollar fine, for… alleged corruption in Indonesia… The European Union has prevented its actors to act dirty. Except for those, like Germany, which play dirty.  

Goodness is always last to play dirty, by definition. However, if goodness never plays dirty in the end, goodness will be devoured by badness, malefaction. Voltaire recommended that we “ought to crush infamy”. That means not turning a blind eye towards those who exploit the rest of the world, just because we are good, and aspire to goodness. Now more than ever.

Patrice Ayme’

DARK MATTER EMERGENCE! (If so, is a New Quantum revolution at hand?)

March 31, 2017

Long story short: My own theory of Dark Matter predicts that Dark Matter is EMERGENT. That could be viewed as a huge flaw, easy to disprove, sending me back to a burrow somewhere to pursue my humble subterranean existence of sorts. HOWEVER, big surprise: DARK MATTER EMERGENCE seems to be exactly what was just observed in 2017, at the European Southern Observatory (ESO)!


Anomalies in the behavior of gravitation at a galactic scale, has become the greatest crisis in physics. Ever:

What is the problem? Four centuries of physics possibly standing on its head! (Using the virial theorem,) Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky discovered and named Dark Matter, or, as Zwicky said in German,  “dunkle Materie“, in 1933. Zwicky observed an enormously mysterious gravitational pull.

Zwicky computed that the observed gravitational pull did not correspond to the visible matter, by an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE, and thus Zwicky assumed that there was plenty of matter that could not be seen. (At the time, physicists scoffed, and went to stuff more interesting to the military, thus, better esteemed and more propitious to glorious splurging and handshakes from political leaders!)

If spiral galaxies were only made up of the matter that we can see, stars at the outer edge should orbit the centre slower than those closer to the center.. But Zwicky  noticed that this was not the case: all the stars in the Andromeda galaxy move at similar speeds, regardless of their distance from the galactic center. (For nationalistic reasons Americans love to attribute DM’s discovery to American astronomers Vera Rubin and Kent Ford .in the 1970s. However great Vera Rubin is, that’s despicable: they worked 40 years after Zwicky.)

Many studies since the 1930s provided evidence for Dark Matter. Such matter doesn’t interact with light, that’s why it is dark. Thus, one can only observe the effects of Dark Matter via its gravitational effects.

Nobel Prizes Were Only Given To the 5% So Far. The 5% Are All What Today’s Official Physics Is About. This Is One Of The Reasons Why I Am Thinking Outside Of Their 5% Box…


How does one compute the mass of a galaxy?

One just look at how many stars it has. (In the Solar System, the sun is a thousand times more massive than all the planets combined; studies on how much stars are moved by the planets around them confirm that most of the mass is in the stars.) And that shows up as the overall light emitted by a galaxy. Summing up the observed light sums up the mass. Or, at least that was the long-standing idea. (More recently, the pull gravitation exerts on light has been used to detect Dark Matter, and it has been used on a… massive scale!) 

At the scale of galaxies, or galactic clusters, the motions of objects is indicating at least ten times the gravitational force that should be there, according to gravitation theory, considering the mass we see (that is the mass of all the stars we see).

Problem: that would mean that he so-called “Standard Model” of physics has no explanation for most of the mass in the galactic clusters.

Reality check: the celebrities of physics are very arrogant, and think they know exactly what the universe had for breakfast, 13.8 billion years ago, and how big it was (never mind that their logic is ridiculously flawed). Up to a few years ago, many were in denial that they were missing most of the mass-energy in the universe with their Standard Model theory. 

However, here they are now, having to admit they missed 95.1&% of the mass-energy in the universe (according to their own latest estimates)!

A low logical cost solution to the riddle of the apparently missing mass, was to decree that all physicists who have studied gravitation since Bullialdus, nearly four centuries ago, got it wrong, and that gravitation is not, after all, an inverse square of the distance law. A problem is that French astronomer Bullaldius’ very elementary reasoning seems still to have kept some validity today. Remember that, in the Quantum Field Theory setting, forces are supposedly due to (virtual) particle exchanges? Well, that was the basic picture Bullialdus had in mind! (Thus those who want to modify so-called “Newtonian Dynamics” wreck the basic particle exchange model!)


Bullialdus’ Inverse Distance Squared Law, Basic to Newton-Eintein:

Ismael Boulliau (aka Bullialdus) a famous astronomer, member of the English Royal Society, proposed the inverse square law for gravity, a generation before Newton. (Bullialdus crater on the Moon, named for Boulliau, would have water, by the way.) Boulliau reasoned that the force would come from particles emitted by the sun, just like light. Here is Bullialdus voice:

“As for the power by which the Sun seizes or holds the planets, and which, being corporeal, functions in the manner of hands, it is emitted in straight lines throughout the whole extent of the world… seeing that it is corporeal, it becomes weaker and attenuated at a greater distance or interval, and the ratio of its decrease in strength is the same as in the case of light, namely, the duplicate proportion, but inversely, of the distances that is, 1/d².”

Why still true today? The carrier of force are particles.If they go to infinite distance (as electromagnetism and gravitation do), then the density of filed carriers (photons, gravitons) will go down, as Bullialdus said, for the reason he gave.

Bullaldius’ observation is the basis of Newton’s gravitation theory, which is itself the first order approximation of Einstein’s theory of gravitation. (Einstein’s gravitaion is a tweak on Newton’s theory; what Einstein did is actually to re-activate Buridan’s inertial theory with advanced mathematics invented by others (Riemann, Ricci, Hilbert, Levi-Civitta)

There is a basic problem here: although Einstein’s theory is a small tweak on Newton’s, MONDs are not. Correcting a theory by a factor of ten, a hundred, or a thousand is no tweak. Moreover: 

The ESO (European Southern Observatory) observation, illustrated above by ESO itself, seems to condemn BOTH of the two known, “official”classes of solutions for the gravitation problem: LCDM Dark Matter and Mond. The only theory left standing is my own Sub Quantic Dark Matter theory, which is fully emergent.


2017 ESO Discovery: Slowly Spinning Old Galaxies:Natascha Förster Schreiber at the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Germany and her colleagues have used the European Very Large Telescope in Chile to make the most detailed observations so far of the movement of six giant galactic discs, 10 billion years ago.

They found that, unlike in (quasi-)contemporary galaxies, the stars at the edges of these galaxies long ago, far away, move more slowly than those closer in.

“This tells us that at early stages of galaxy formation, the relative distribution of the normal matter and the dark matter was significantly different from what it is today,” says Förster Schreiber. (Well, maybe. MY interpretation would be very different! No DM!)

In order to check their unexpected results, the researchers used a “stack” of 101 images of other early galaxies to find an average picture of their rotations. The stacked galaxies matched the rotations of the more rigorously studied ones. “We’re not just looking at six weirdo galaxies – this could be more common,” says Förster Schreiber. “For me, that was the wow moment.”


MOdified Newtonian Dynamics (MONDs) Don’t Work:

About 10 billion years ago, there was a peak formation period of galaxies. By looking 10 billion light years away, one can see what was going on then, and have plenty of galaxies to look at. Where was the Dark Matter there? Was there Dark Matter then? One can answer these questions by just looking, because Dark Matter shows up in the way galaxies rotate, or orbit (in galactic cluster).

The result is both completely unexpected and spectacular! I am thrilled by it, because what is observed to happen is exactly the main prediction of MY theory of Dark Matter!

What is found is that, ten billion years ago, the largest star-forming galaxies were dominated by normal matter, not by the dark matter that’s so influential in galaxies today. (I reckon that this result was already indicated by the existence of galaxies which are mostly Dark Matter… at least in my sort of cosmology which differs massively from the standard Lambda Cold Dark Matter, LCDM model.)

MOND theories, relativistic or not, say that gravity is ten times stronger at, say, 30,000 light years away from a mass. If that’s the true law of gravitation in the last few hundreds of millions of years (as observed in presently surrounding galaxies), it should have been the case ten billion years ago. But that’s not what’s observed. So MOND theories can’t be true


LCDM cop-out: Dark Matter makes halos, like around the Virgin Mary’s Head!

On the face of it, the discovery about those ten billion year old galaxies say that the galactic disks then did not contain Dark Matter. That seems to me that it shoots down both MOND theories and the LCDM model (that’s the fancy name for the conventional Big Bang, latest version).

However, conventional scientists, and, in particular, cosmologists, are good at pirouettes, that’s why they are professionals.  There is still a (twisted) logical escape for LCDM model. The differences in early galaxies’ rotations demonstrates that there is very little Dark Matter in towards the middle of their disks, to start with, reason the Cold Dark Matter specialists. Instead, those ancient galaxies’ disks are almost entirely made up of the matter we see as stars and gas. The further away (and thus earlier in cosmic history) the galaxies were, the less dark matter their disks contained.

The specialists suggest that the turbulent gas in early galaxies condensed into the flat, rotating disk shapes we see today more quickly than Dark Matter, which remained in a diffuse  “halo”, which would progressively fall in… but had not started to falling enough, ten billion years ago. (That’s weird, because I thought LCDM mixed normal matter and dark matter, right from the start. In any case, I am not going to make their increasingly fishy case for them!).

Dark Matter gathers – but it takes time. This is exactly what my theory of Dark Matter predicts. In my own theory, Dark Matter is the result, the debris, of Quantum Interactions (entanglement resolutions, singularization) at very large distances. This debris gathering takes time.

My Dark Matter theory predicts that Dark Matter is an Emergent phenomenon. No other theory does that. Studies of more than 100 old giant galaxies support my theory, why making the situation (very) difficult for the conventional Dark Matter theory (“LCDM”) and impossible for the MOND theories.

This progressive build-up  of Dark Matter is NOT predicted by the other two Dark Matter theories. The standard (LCDM) cosmological Dark Matter model does NOT predict a slow gathering of Dark Matter. Nor does the  MOdified Newtonian Dynamics theories (MOND, relativistic or not) predict a slow apparition of Dark Matter.m the center and most of the visible matter.

It has been taken for granted by the Dark Matter advocates that Dark Matter, a sort of non-standard standard matter, was in the universe from its legendary start, the Big Boom, aka, Big Bang,

This is an important step in trying to figure out how galaxies like the Milky Way and larger galaxies must have assembled,” says Mark Swinbank at Durham University. “Having a constraint on how early the gas and stars must have formed the discs and how well-mixed they were with dark matter is important to informing their evolution.”

Journal reference: Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature21685

Right. Or maybe, as I speculate, for plenty of excellent reasons coming from logically far away, this is an indication that not Gravitation Theory, but Quantum Theory, is not correct. Oh, the Standard Model, too, is not correct. But we all already knew this…

Conclusion: If the ESO observation that Dark Matter was not present in large galactic disks, ten billion years ago, is correct, I cannot imagine how MOdified Newtonian Dynamics theories could survive. And I find highly implausible that LCDM would. All what is left standing, is my own theory, the apparent main flaw of which, is now turned into a spectacular prediction! DARK MATTER Appears SLOWLY as predicted by Patrice Ayme’s SUB-QUANTIC Model. (Wow!)

Patrice Ayme’

Europe Is Dead, Long Live Europe! And long live US publicly subsidized Pluto universities, too!

March 29, 2017

45 years ago Britain was a member of what became formally later the “European Union”. However, anti-Europeans in Britain, mostly on the so-called left (“Labor”) screamed that a referendum should have been conducted to see whether the British People really wanted to be part of Europe. The matter should not having been left to Parliament. One of these screamers presently leads the British Labor Party (Corbyn).

So a law was passed by the UK Parliament, saying that a referendum on belonging to Europe would happen, and would have force of law. Once again, 45 years ago. (NOT last year!) The referendum was conducted, and nearly two-third of British People approved that the UK should be in Europe.

In the meantime, Thatcherism happened. PM Thatcher, a strident nationalist, actually passed the Single European Act (SEA). SEA reformed the legislative process all over Europe by introducing the cooperation procedure and by extending the Qualified Majority Voting to new areas. The legislative process was also quickened. The SEA was supposed to create a better Single European market. Meanwhile, Great britain became ever more inequalitarian.

The British Are Most Enraged, Because Their Society Is Most Unequal.

So now here we are, and Great Britain wants out of Europe… But not out of the European Single market. That’s a complete contradiction. Indeed, understand that the obstacles to the single market are not tariffs: the WTO limits those to 3%… The obstacles have to do with laws and regulations, hence the necessity for the SEA. The point is that if one wants a single market, one has to have laws which are in common enough.

British PM May evoked Article 50, setting the exit of Britain from the EU within 2 years.

[In fairness, let’s give PM May a word sideways here. PM May tried to strike a firm but conciliatory tone, in her letter to Donald Tusk, president of the EU, declaring that the Brexit vote

was no rejection of the values we share as fellow Europeans. Nor was it an attempt to do harm to the European Union or any of the remaining member states. On the contrary, the United Kingdom wants the European Union to succeed and prosper. Instead, the referendum was a vote to restore, as we see it, our national self-determination. We are leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe – and we want to remain committed partners and allies to our friends across the continent.“]

With all due respect, that’s just PC hogwash. To start with it hurts. Secondly, there is an amount of 60 billion dollars in committed EU projects that the UK is committed to finance. Secondly, to access the European Single Market, the UK will have to respect EU law, and pay for the EU infrastructure, just as Norway (or Switzerland) do.

So what happened? Plutocracy, that’s what. Plutocracy owns the media, and felt threatened by the EU government. Plutocracy depends upon tax evasion and (“elected”) government manipulation (and the more than 17 “crown dependencies, part of UK which are tax havens).

Plutocracy rules by mental manipulation. Example: look at the Ivy League universities in the USA. They are the elite universities where the children of the elite get together, live together, plot together, and get instructed on how the manipulate the naive rabble they are expected, and expecting to rule and exploit.

The Ivy League comprises eight campuses: Dartmouth, Columbia, Princeton, Yale, Harvard, Brown, Cornell, Penn have a combined 191 billion dollars in endowment. They got 41 billion in 6 years from US, and paid no tax on their profits (which should have been 9,6 billion dollars, too!

(Of course Obama went to Columbia and then Harvard; in Columbia Obama met ZBig, the guy who make Carter to attack formally Afghanistan on July 3, 1979… ZBig saw in Obama the ideal vehicle to pursue the Pluto empire…)

Average parents pay $33,000 a year for private universities , and $9,000 for public universities.  

Is there hope? Some of the buffoons are becoming more aware. Richard Dreyfus was one of the fanatics who voted for Hillary Clinton, campaigned against Trump, and ignored Bernie Sanders (as he readily admits; Sanders would have beaten Trump is the democrats had selected him, studies have shown). Now he is against Hillary. Why? He discovered she was “for Wall Street”. Hillary went to San Francisco, all dressed in black leather:”insist, persist, resist!” Actually she is pushing her latest book.

Still No Message Of Any Substance, that’s why people who voted for Obama, in a last burst of hope, in 2012, voted for Trump in 2016, in the crucial states, the famed “Blue Wall”.

The Brexit vote rested on an arsenal of lies, imparted to the minds of British voters by the Plutocratic media. Basically, all is false, therein.

Also the vote itself was fraudulent, as it was supposed to be just a “consultation”, not legislating. No worries: Great Britain is not really a democracy, but a rule of one (mono-archy).   

So what’s next? We will see. London did its best to sabotage the EU for decades, and it’s just more of the same. A few months ago, Teresa May threaten to turn the UK into a “tax haven”. That’s of course disinformation: the UK is already a tax haven, and that’s why real estate has never been so expensive in London, the most expensive real estate in the world, by far. Plutocrats from the entire planet are flocking to London, knowing full well that the British government has no choice, but keeping on playing the Plutocratic card…

The fact that the USA’s richest universities are getting positively enormous subsidies is revealing that, once one has captured the minds of the idiots, even in democracy, especially in democracy, one can get away with anything. A Manchurian candidate made it to the presidency for 8 years, and now the Wall Street “opposition” keeps on capturing the hearts and minds of the fake left. Alleluia!

And what of Europe? Same problem, plus a deer-in-the-headlights syndrome. As long as progressives have not figured out in which direction progress lays, the likes of may will rule, complete with leopard shoes high heels, just to make sure she overlords all the uneducated out there… Her “Brexit” has no meaning, and she knows it, but the lords she serves, the world plutocrats have no meaning either, all they want is ever more prerogatives… And they don’t intent to jump off the gravy train, anymore than president Putin and PM Medvedev in Russia. Massive demonstrations there have exposed the latter as the face of state corruption in Russia (his enormous palaces, for example next to Sochi have long been notorious; a bat researcher was emprisoned for taking pictures of Medvedev’s palace there, and protesting the destruction of bat caves next to it; ultimaterly he had to flee Russia to the UK…)

One may wonder why this global plutocracy problem seems so much alike all around the planet. It is simple: the democracy we have is NOT the real thing. The ideal of democracy we have (as espoused by Russia) is NOT the real thing. Clinton-Bush-Obama, this triple head hydra is the same problem as Putin. Basically. It does not matter if it’s Russia, or California.

Real democracy should be about We The People ruling directly, as much as possible. Instead, what we have is a parody of democracy. Brexit is the poster child of this absurdity: although there was a referendum, it was all about lies. The referendum was conducted in a sea of lies, under fake assumptions, and false pretense. So now Britain is going to spend, and waste, Europe’s time for the next ten years of its convoluted, unending Brexiting… Before asking to go back in, supposing in ever leaves, which is not really the plan.

The real plan is to make the British National Health Service a new source of profit for the US health “care” industry. Oh, by the way, do you know how many people are enrolled in “Obamacare”? Eleven millions. Another nine millions are truly in Medicare. Meanwhile, the subsidies to the health care for profit industry, just as the subsidies for US plutocratic universities, have much augmented. Alleluia! We may as well have fun, watching plutocrats soar into orbit.

Just to make sure we get the picture, British PM May wants us to know she is completely mad. On day first of the Brexit negotiations she let it be known that if the European Union will not submit, she will let terrorists do their thing to Europe. May’s words insist that there is an implied threat, the prime minister’s letter being explicit. “In security terms, a failure to reach agreement [with the EU] would mean our cooperation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened,” she wrote.

It does matter that PM May personally lacks credibility. That’s the whole point: plutocracy will make people do, and submit to, incredible things. Reason is in the way, so it should be disposed of.

Patrice Ayme’

Consciousness, Nonlocality, Free Will

March 26, 2017

DS asked in Aeon: “Patrice, in what way is consciousness “nonlocal”, and what is the evidence for this?”

DS: Science  and technique progress, and thus so do our visions of the world. Quantum computers are becoming a reality. Quantum computers work in a completely different way from the classical computers we presently have (which, fundamentally are of the same type as those the Greeks had, more than 2,000 years ago!). Present (2017) versions of Quantum computers are primitive relative to what’s coming (Artificial Consciousness computers). And you know what? Full Quantum computers depend crucially upon nonlocality.


Descartes located consciousness (“the soul”) in a tiny part of the brain (the pituitary gland).  I guess because Descartes considered it was the only part of the brain with a unique character, just like the soul is unique to the mind? Now we know the pituitary is just a master neurohormonal center…) 

Philosophers And People of Culture Have to Learn New Words and Especially the Concepts Having to Do With Quantum & Nonlocality. Lest they Become the New Barbarians…

Split brain, and other surgeries have revealed that consciousness can’t be localized that way, inside a tiny organ (whereas short-term memory can be localized, to the hippocampus, fear to the amygdala, vision to 17 areas in the cortex, etc.)

So, in that gross sense, consciousness is non-local.

Next, we are now basically certain that basic biology uses the Quantum (we have a few telling examples already, not just chlorophyll). By this I mean that consciousness uses individual quanta and their nonlocal behavior (for example individual photon, or individual electrons, the latter when, and precisely because, delocalized).

Indeed, what is the most fundamental property of the Quantum? Not just that it is quantified. Nonlocality is the Quantum most important property. The Quantum is quantified because it is nonlocal (Einstein did not understand this his entire life, from 1905 to his death). Nonlocality is the crucial difficulty of Quantum Physics (it shows up as Schrödinger cats, EPR paradox, etc.)

Supposing that the most fundamental thing we know of in the universe, consciousness, can, somehow, avoid the most fundamental physics we have found in the universe, is a form of denial akin to climate denial, or parallel universes. Ignoring Quantum Physics, as a fundamental conceptual tool to understand consciousness can only be explained by prejudice.

What prejudice? Most cultured people have no understanding, let alone feeling, for the Quantum. So they desperately clinging to Classical mechanics, something best suited for artillery shells…

As the Quantum is essentially nonlocal, and fundamental to consciousness, so is consciousness.

And what of the Quantum deniers? Well they miss entirely the immensely rich new logic that Quantum logic has offered beyond Classical logic…

The preceding should not be construed as an endorsement of so-called weirdly named “extrasensory perception”. Instead, I have argued that the sensory system itself is nonlocal (pretty much a physiological evidence, too, as we see with 17 areas…)

A trivial, but telling, case could be called “Free Will and Cosmic Rays”. Cosmic rays, cosmic elementary particles, can be millions of times more energetic than the most powerful elementary particles created by man, at CERN (their origin is obscure, logically speaking). It is known that cosmic rays can change the states of present computers (so even present computers are unpredictable!) Now the scale at which present computers operate is classical (as in classical mechanics), it is hundreds of times larger than the scale at which the inner machinery of cells operate.

That means that the inner machinery of neurons will be put in different states by cosmic rays, just like smartphones. There goes the freedom of Free Will. “Free Will” may feel free, but it may well have, and sometimes surely will have been, directed from a galaxy long ago, far away… This spectacular conclusion is not a matter of opinion. It’s a matter of science. And I have not even considered the question of (the extremely nonlocal) Quantum Entanglement. Quantum Entanglement is real and makes matters way worse.

Some will say, that’s fine, we don’t need to know all this stuff, we can be happy, and we can still pontificate about our classical notions of “Free Will” and “Consciousness”. Indeed, those who want to stay primitive, should. Yes. Yet, within bounds. There are limits to barbarity that civilization needs to set-up, as a matter of survival.

Those who want to cling to a more barbarian, less scientific past certainly cannot claim to have the will to moral superiority. They are like those who believe Muhammad rode to Jerusalem on a winged mule. One cannot accept the principle that one can believe in anything, accept that anybody can believe in anything, and civilization will go on. Verily, superior morality, superior smarts.

If anything, Quantum Physics show that much more things are connected in mysterious ways than ever thought possible. Even space and time get entangled in “Quantum Procrastination“, and cease to have any conventional meaning.

To believe that this completely new, immensely more subtle than was ever suspected (Quantum) universe, has nothing to do with the way we perceive it, and conceive of it, would be an astoundingly naive, revoltingly obsolete, lack of introspection, a short step away from those winged mules.

Patrice Ayme’

Massive Nonlinearity In Climate Now Obvious, And Why

March 24, 2017

If one thinks about it, much of life as we know it depends upon the white poles. The temperature of Earth depends upon said polar regions. The poles, as long as they are covered with snow, reflect much light into space. That’s why the poles are white: because they are reflectors. Remove the poles’ whiteness, and Earth will absorb much more sunlight, her average temperature will shoot up. This is already happening, the effect is self-feeding, and, thus, nonlinear. This exponential effect is already apparent in two ways:

  1. the temperatures in the Arctic have climbed at a rate up to five or even ten times faster than anywhere else (as local whiteness, albedo, disappear).
  2. at some point, one expects the global temperature to do the same, and exit the linear regime. This is exactly what one has observed in the last couple of years. Also the main warming system of the biosphere, El Nino, seems to be running for the second year in a row (it used to run only every seven years, or so). 

So we are leaving the linear rise in the greenhouse effects, to enter a faster, nonlinear phase.

This should not surprise anybody. Look at the CO2 graph, superimposed on a picture of Earth’s atmosphere (contemplate how thin it is!) The CO2 concentration is already massively nonlinear, and it is the main driver of climate, thus climate’s behavior can only be so.

That graph should be meditated upon. First put it on all the wall each decision maker looks the most at. Yes, horizontally, that’s half a million years…

Reality is even worse, as the graph above does not take into account other gases which have an even stronger greenhouse effect, individually than CO2, sometimes by a factor of thousands of times, per unit of mass, and which are all man-made. Nor CH4, methane, related to cattle bowels and decaying permafrost or warmed-up, exploding methane clathrates, in the preceding graph, although its greenhouse effect is huge.

CO2 concentrations are the highest since Homo Sapiens evolved. Also the change of greenhouse gas concentrations is the most brutal ever since at least 17 million years ago (when the Columbia LIP, Large Igneous Province, occurred, and, presumably, vast amounts of CO2 were injected in the atmosphere).

During the last high CO2 concentration, 110,000 years ago, although said concentrations were much less than now, average temperature got a bit higher than now (one Celsius) Sea level was at least seven meters higher. 

The nonlinear collapse of whiteness on Earth (“Earth albedo) is apparent in the sudden collapse of the ice-covered regions in both the Arctic and the Antarctic, this last season 2016–2017. Clearly, linear graphs can’t be extended anymore, as far as spaceship Earth is concerned. Tickling the dragon by the tail works for a while, until one gets scorched!

Patrice Ayme’


Colonization All Over. So Why So Bad?

March 23, 2017

It goes without saying that colonization was a terrible thing, whine those who want to look good to themselves and other whiners. Colonization was a crime, they insist. At least that’s what PC people howl on every roof, as part of their unwitting campaign of rage against civilization. Because civilization, which was not civilized, caused colonization, this evil of evils, they crowe. Right.

We the descendants of the colonized shall howl from every roof what victims we are.

We the descendants of the colonizers, shall howl on every roof what criminals we are.

We the bipolar paranoid schizophrenic stand as accused, and may as well be mowed down by Islam driving SUVs, trucks, jumbo jets, and non sense, all over us.


Indeed, ladies and gentlemen, who does not descend from colonialists and colonizers?

All the Americas were colonized.

All of Oceania was colonized (twice at least).

Was the colonization of Australia by aborigines (who are part Denisovans), 50,000 years ago, a bad thing? It killed a lot of marsupials!

Sénégal: Organized, unified, but never really colonized! A very rare case!

Japan was colonized (twice at least). Japanese civilization started for real, when the archipelago was colonized. By the Chinese.

Some will say China was never colonized. Well, there used to be 100 nations with 100 languages in China, as recently as three centuries ago (the emperor himself recognized then, in a very sophisticated intellectual exchange with the Jesuits; and he expressed both his will to respect that, and his incapacity to do otherwise). However, nowadays, Mandarin (just one language) is taking over, all over. And all Chinese are forced to assimilate with the Borg in Beijing. That’s colonization therein. Is it bad? My daughter is learning Chinese, or, more exactly, Mandarin. She will be able to talk all over.

Madagascar was colonized (thrice; from Indonesia, Africa, France). Even Greenland was conquered by the Inuits, who pushed away the Vikings… (On their way, the Inuits had annihilated previous denizens in the northern Canada archipelago…)

Most of Africa was colonized multiple times. By descendants of Neanderthals (!), Bantus, Phoenicians, Greco-Romans, Arabs, etc.

All of Russia is a huge colony, all the way to Kamchatka. “Russ” initially means Eastern Swedes.  The Eastern Swedes, Viking style, invaded the huge placid rivers of Eastern Europe, all the way down to the Black Sea (where they could trade with the Romans). In the Tenth Century, Vladimir of Kiev conquered Crimea from the local Khan (Mongols who had themselves conquered centuries earlier the Greeks, who had conquered a millennium prior, etc.)  

Even China was momentarily (a few centuries here and there) conquered by Buddhists, Tibetans, Mongols, Mandchous…

Arabia was greatly colonized by Persia, much later Turkey (Ottomans) for centuries.


Europe, shortly before Rome rose, was invaded by the Celto-Germans, who covered up the entire continent, all the way to Anatolia. When Caesar invaded, Gaul (“Gallia”) was made of 60 nation-states.

Much of India was invaded, colonized by white men coming from the north, central Asia, four thousand years ago, or more. That’s why India and Europe enjoy the same Indo-European language family.

Egypt was invaded by the Arabs, more exactly by Caliph Omar’s army. Never recovered (whereas Egypt had recovered from colonization by Black Pharaohs, Nubians, Sea People, Libyans, Greeks and Romans). Egyptians themselves had to decolonize the Sahara desert and concentrate on the Nile Valley and adjoining oases.


A real question is: which places in the world were not colonized?

Paradoxically, much of West Africa is one of the most pristine, uncolonized places.

West Africa is generally viewed as having been a French, British, Portuguese colony, and that’s superficially true.

West Africa also exported a lot of slaves (to the Americas).

However, West Africa was one of the much untouched places. (Contrarily to whiny repute!)

Not like Europe: all old European languages were wiped out by the Indo-European, Celto-German invasion (or close to it: Basque is a tiny remnant of what once was.)

And don’t brandish southern Europeans as old stock: the Middle Easterners came from the Fertile Crescent, with their futuristic crops (wheat, etc.) and their genes, 9,000 years ago. Another invasion to run over the many Sapiens invasions all over Europe, in the last 100,000 years. Neanderthals made it to North Africa, big time, and their genes to South Africa, but apparently not to West Africa.


A real question: when is colonization good, when is it bad?

From the point of view of the invaded, one will guess that colonization is often bad. Yes, but not always. The invasion of Gallia by Caesar would end up creating the strongest part of the Roman empire, Francia, and the Birth of the West. Viewed that way, it was a good thing. And it sure is a good thing if there was no other way to get that good thing. Was it? We don’t know. Was Caesar innocent of the invasion? We don’t really know.


“Colonization” in West Africa was mostly a joke, or more exactly, civilizing: ten French officers ordered around 5,000 Senegalese soldiers who, truly, conquered Sénégal. So, in truth, Senegal conquered Senegal under French management. In truth, there were basically no colons in Senegal: the land stayed property of the Senegalese (compare with the USA, where Indian lands were nearly completely distributed by the colonial government in Washington to the European colons!)

A big argument for the “colonization” of Africa was the eradication of slavery, which was endemic, pandemic, chronic, extensive and ubiquitous in Africa (the globalization of African slavery to the Americas, escaping the long arm of European law, has not been properly characterized…)

Here are the national languages of Senegal:

Some of these languages are tonal, some are not (making them a different as latin and Chinese!) It goes without saying that packing such different nations in so tight a space (less than 200,000 square kilometers), result in mayhem, just to keep the population stable. So Senegal has, rightly so, just one national language.


Colonization is good when it brings lots of progress, and less mayhem:

This should go without saying. However, the usual interpretation of (hard) multiculturalism is that all cultures are equally worth of respect. This thesis implies that progress does not exist. So we may as well regress, and have plutocracy.

So we see who these proponents of hard multiculturalism were trying to seduce: the powers that be.

By refusing to see when, how colonization has been, and could be, good, they refuse to bring reason to judge destiny. A silly attitude, considering how fast destiny moves these days.

But of course fundamentally hypocritical.

At least, nobody can accuse me to be a hypocrite. I don’t under (hypo) criticize. It’s much more fun, to over-criticize… And criticize all over… Colonization: assess, but don’t deny, its crimes, just as its merits. And remember the fine lines between colonization and immigration.

Patrice Ayme’