Now we need to apply this same historical and investigative analysis to the origins of medical research where we will discover how big pharma was born and came to rule medical science to the detriment of health care; charlatans such as Fauci had their beginnings, at least, as far back as Louis Pasteur, who was the Fauci of his day, a second-rate chemist who stole most of the discoveries he was credited with from Antoine Bechamp, a true genius of his day; even Pasteur, acknowledged on his death bed, that his "germ theory" was wrong and that bacteria and "viruses" only became pathogenic when human systems were immune compromised or weakened and our bodies were then vulnerable to opportunistic "invaders"; Bechamp understood this based on his real scientific experimentation as did Florence Nightingale whose experiences during the Crimean war led her to similar discoveries about the need for clean and healthy environments, including the environment of the human body; Pasteur's real legacy was to ensure that the fraudulent belief in "vaccines" was to be the unquestioned "cure" for all disease; the real motivation, not surprisingly, was that MONEY was to be made and controlled by a medical oligarchy(mafia) and that human health and well being took a back seat to greed and corruption to the extent never imagined....except in today's world!
Great work. Connect the dots... entropic (subject to immutable laws of diminishing returns guided by an inevitable heat death).... sounds like the precursor of Global Warming. History connected and brought into the current era. Must read and reread. Thanks.
If entropy is 'immutable' then it should also be eternal. Intuitively then, either our model of the universe (big bang) is wrong, or our definition of 'entropy' is wrong since the two concepts are mutually exclusive. In either case, a negentropic event is required to explain the starting point, or conversely, why the eternal exists at all.
If the theory of entropy is true, the concept can only be applied at the macro-scale. There is nothing in the theory itself that forbids local pockets of negative entropy, as long as conservation of energy is not violated on the macro-scale.
Isn't that what life is? A multi-billion year negative entropic event of primitive systems giving rise to ever more complex systems based entirely on the laws of physics and chemistry as applied over time?
Korzybski pointed out in the 1930s that 'the map is not the territory.' Under that rubric, entropy is simply a Cartesian coordinate system applied to a non-linear space. The description will always fall short of the reality, which is why Columbus didn't fall of the edge of the world, although contemporary cartologists were correct in pointing out that 'here be dragons.'
Brilliant historical background and a vital part of what has been missing in education for far too long; without knowing about and understanding our past we have been led into the darkness of lies and deception in which humanity finds itself today; Cynthia and Matthew's work are not only amazingly insightful and enlightening but provide a renewed hope for the redemption of a "fallen world" as long as such truth seekers as these two authors continue to show us the way.
You win the internet today for pointing out the influence of entropy.
Beneath the sophistry and obfuscation lies the reason for the persistence of Malthusian thinking and Darwinian cant; what we incentivize, we get more of.
The parable of the Kaibab Plateau obtains.
Increase the food supply in any habitat, and procreation accelerates until starvation restores the population to that which can survive.
This doesn't make eugenic Malthusianism right or proper (remembering that those words are assertions of valuation,) it means that the underlying mechanisms must be acknowledged and understood. Without that acknowledgement, no alternative can be discovered and implemented.
I am convinced that Georgescu-Roegin's analysis holds one of the keys to understanding how to manage entropy in a way that does not descend into the savagery of eugenics.
I'm so tired of feeling like a Cassandra, until you two great investigators but more than that you are fantastic you have that very bardic touch that makes history a vivid almost cinematic, unforgetable
My late husband had that quality, I remember that in an asado full of History professors they were
almost paralized telling them the incredible trip of the Spanish Juan Ladrillero, specially the Southern Fiords of Chile, where winds of 230Km. per hour, that he himself lived exploring the Continental Ices.
"Today’s world is faced with two possible future systems."
I'm always a bit skeptical when I see an issue framed as a choice between one of only two possibilities. This is pure Hegelian dialectics, which got us into this mess in the first place, and which has been, and continues to be used as a means of dividing people and setting them against one another.
You can see this clearly in the stark political division between 'left' and 'right' in present day USA - terms which, as Hegelian markers, fail to embrace the multiple facets within those categories, as well as the fundamental similarities that subsume them both.
I'm not going to write a treatise on this (others have done a better job than I ever could) but simply point out that the way we frame a debate and define our terms sets the boundaries within which discourse can occur. This represents a form of (often self-imposed) control which can only be overcome by a dedicated effort to think outside the cube.
" I am now giving you the choice between life and death, between God's blessing and God's curse, and I call heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Choose life."(Deuteronomy 30:19) There's your two possibilities among any others we can conjure up; the Good Lord made it a simple choice for us...choose the God-given life our Creator bestowed upon all of us!
Karl. You appear to be a very confused person. You claim I photoshoped the Limits to Growth cover before building an argument on some imagined fallacy. Nowhere did I photoshop the LTG cover or falsely add names of authors to the book. Secondly, even the Club of Rome acknowledges having launched the MIT project that became the Limits to Growth, and as I cite in 'THE LIMITS TO INFLUENCE: THE CLUB OF ROME AND CANADA, 1968 TO 1988' by J. Churchill hyperlinked in the text itself, the funding for that study demonstrably was made possible through the 1971 meeting of the Club of Rome in Montebello Quebec under the hive of Malthusians associated with Pierre Trudeau which are also outlined in the text which you claim to have read. That text is located as a hyperlink, and I include it here:
Even the World Economic Forum admits on their official website to have featured Aurelio Peccei and the Club of Rome models in the 1973 Summit (*which the WEF also admits was financed principally by Prince Bernhardt himself which is not a coincidence). That evidence is also hyperlinked within the above text and which you can read here: https://widgets.weforum.org/history/1973.html
The concept of "universal entropy" was treated by myself and many other researchers over the course of many generations. Recently, I authored a five part series on the topic called 'Is the Universe Governed by Death or Life' which treats it at some length.
"Entropy" as far as it was defined by Sadi Carnot as a function of heat powered machines losing the potential to do work over time as energy is lost irreversably, is not disputed as a phenomenon that applies to any closed system, but it IS disputed as far as anyone attempts to impose it onto the entirety of the universe which exhibits qualitative states that could not exist were entropy assumed to be universal.
For instance, how would you address the presence of the golden section in the geometry of living systems as well as organizational structure of planetary orbits as demonstrated by Kepler?
Also how would you begin to explain how the assumption of "universal entropy" can co-exist with alongside the evidence of qualitative transformations from non life a planet shaped by living matter? Or what about non-conscious living matter to the discontinuous appearance of living matter? Or what about the appearance of conscious thinking matter out of the continuous stream of living systems exhibiting no such access to self-awareness, understanding of causality etc?
Perhaps you believe this to be a function of chance, and if so, then I feel bad for you.
Or perhaps you don't think such questions are worthy of your time, and if so I also would feel bad for you.
But perhaps you have given it some honest thought and care about such questions, and if so, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.
I am in concordant agreement. There are vast quantities of resources in the universe to be used but they are limited by the intellectual potential of our species. Ten billion Indians and Africans are not going to change the trajectory of life on this planet. I have heard modest proposals of thorium reactors and thermal nuclear fusion but they seem to be not politically viable or still immature in development. Why do smarter birds migrate less during the winter? Why have humans flourished? We construct an insensitive environment that is non-variable, which significantly dropped child mortality. Unfortunately we will soon pay the price for an inverted population pyramid and an increasing standard of living amongst eight billion, I do not want 10 chinas on this earth where I must drink cancerous water and food. With unlimited energy it is not a concern of course as any inefficient process could be driven to reverse or forward direction, such as breaking things down to their subatomic components and reconstructing them back up. Nevertheless an advanced civilization requires higher energetic needs and consumption per capita. No self sustaining system can indefinitely maintain its processes without a selection function to what may be deemed to be useful to itself, like homeostatic control. Cognition must be pursued to the highest degree so that information and knowledge can be harnessed to better exploit the universe’s abundance, so I disagree with whatever thesis is put here.
Now we need to apply this same historical and investigative analysis to the origins of medical research where we will discover how big pharma was born and came to rule medical science to the detriment of health care; charlatans such as Fauci had their beginnings, at least, as far back as Louis Pasteur, who was the Fauci of his day, a second-rate chemist who stole most of the discoveries he was credited with from Antoine Bechamp, a true genius of his day; even Pasteur, acknowledged on his death bed, that his "germ theory" was wrong and that bacteria and "viruses" only became pathogenic when human systems were immune compromised or weakened and our bodies were then vulnerable to opportunistic "invaders"; Bechamp understood this based on his real scientific experimentation as did Florence Nightingale whose experiences during the Crimean war led her to similar discoveries about the need for clean and healthy environments, including the environment of the human body; Pasteur's real legacy was to ensure that the fraudulent belief in "vaccines" was to be the unquestioned "cure" for all disease; the real motivation, not surprisingly, was that MONEY was to be made and controlled by a medical oligarchy(mafia) and that human health and well being took a back seat to greed and corruption to the extent never imagined....except in today's world!
I think you'd enjoy the book "The End to Upside Down Medicine" by Mark Gober. If you haven't already read it.
Great work. Connect the dots... entropic (subject to immutable laws of diminishing returns guided by an inevitable heat death).... sounds like the precursor of Global Warming. History connected and brought into the current era. Must read and reread. Thanks.
If entropy is 'immutable' then it should also be eternal. Intuitively then, either our model of the universe (big bang) is wrong, or our definition of 'entropy' is wrong since the two concepts are mutually exclusive. In either case, a negentropic event is required to explain the starting point, or conversely, why the eternal exists at all.
If the theory of entropy is true, the concept can only be applied at the macro-scale. There is nothing in the theory itself that forbids local pockets of negative entropy, as long as conservation of energy is not violated on the macro-scale.
Isn't that what life is? A multi-billion year negative entropic event of primitive systems giving rise to ever more complex systems based entirely on the laws of physics and chemistry as applied over time?
Korzybski pointed out in the 1930s that 'the map is not the territory.' Under that rubric, entropy is simply a Cartesian coordinate system applied to a non-linear space. The description will always fall short of the reality, which is why Columbus didn't fall of the edge of the world, although contemporary cartologists were correct in pointing out that 'here be dragons.'
Very well written. The Sun never sets on Malthusian thought.
Brilliant historical background and a vital part of what has been missing in education for far too long; without knowing about and understanding our past we have been led into the darkness of lies and deception in which humanity finds itself today; Cynthia and Matthew's work are not only amazingly insightful and enlightening but provide a renewed hope for the redemption of a "fallen world" as long as such truth seekers as these two authors continue to show us the way.
Great article - thank you!
Excellent work as always
You win the internet today for pointing out the influence of entropy.
Beneath the sophistry and obfuscation lies the reason for the persistence of Malthusian thinking and Darwinian cant; what we incentivize, we get more of.
The parable of the Kaibab Plateau obtains.
Increase the food supply in any habitat, and procreation accelerates until starvation restores the population to that which can survive.
This doesn't make eugenic Malthusianism right or proper (remembering that those words are assertions of valuation,) it means that the underlying mechanisms must be acknowledged and understood. Without that acknowledgement, no alternative can be discovered and implemented.
I am convinced that Georgescu-Roegin's analysis holds one of the keys to understanding how to manage entropy in a way that does not descend into the savagery of eugenics.
Interesting read about the logically closed minds by men of the social science.
No consideration there is an unknown to upset their achieved harmony of view and equilibrium.
Lauding the ego remains with us as fact still.
I'm so tired of feeling like a Cassandra, until you two great investigators but more than that you are fantastic you have that very bardic touch that makes history a vivid almost cinematic, unforgetable
My late husband had that quality, I remember that in an asado full of History professors they were
almost paralized telling them the incredible trip of the Spanish Juan Ladrillero, specially the Southern Fiords of Chile, where winds of 230Km. per hour, that he himself lived exploring the Continental Ices.
https://exploringyourmind.com/juan-fernandez-ladrillero-spanish-explorer/
Thanks for the ability to collapse comments.
"Today’s world is faced with two possible future systems."
I'm always a bit skeptical when I see an issue framed as a choice between one of only two possibilities. This is pure Hegelian dialectics, which got us into this mess in the first place, and which has been, and continues to be used as a means of dividing people and setting them against one another.
You can see this clearly in the stark political division between 'left' and 'right' in present day USA - terms which, as Hegelian markers, fail to embrace the multiple facets within those categories, as well as the fundamental similarities that subsume them both.
I'm not going to write a treatise on this (others have done a better job than I ever could) but simply point out that the way we frame a debate and define our terms sets the boundaries within which discourse can occur. This represents a form of (often self-imposed) control which can only be overcome by a dedicated effort to think outside the cube.
Foundational material for potential non-cubists:
https://vdocuments.net/alfred-korzybski-science-and-sanity-56789d3882f91.html?page=1
For the mathematically inclined:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MU_puzzle
And an inspirational video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP5oHL3zBDg
"So, what is MU" he asked? "Managed Uncertainty" she replied cryptically.
" I am now giving you the choice between life and death, between God's blessing and God's curse, and I call heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Choose life."(Deuteronomy 30:19) There's your two possibilities among any others we can conjure up; the Good Lord made it a simple choice for us...choose the God-given life our Creator bestowed upon all of us!
Karl. You appear to be a very confused person. You claim I photoshoped the Limits to Growth cover before building an argument on some imagined fallacy. Nowhere did I photoshop the LTG cover or falsely add names of authors to the book. Secondly, even the Club of Rome acknowledges having launched the MIT project that became the Limits to Growth, and as I cite in 'THE LIMITS TO INFLUENCE: THE CLUB OF ROME AND CANADA, 1968 TO 1988' by J. Churchill hyperlinked in the text itself, the funding for that study demonstrably was made possible through the 1971 meeting of the Club of Rome in Montebello Quebec under the hive of Malthusians associated with Pierre Trudeau which are also outlined in the text which you claim to have read. That text is located as a hyperlink, and I include it here:
https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/handle/10012/747/jlchurch2006.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Even the World Economic Forum admits on their official website to have featured Aurelio Peccei and the Club of Rome models in the 1973 Summit (*which the WEF also admits was financed principally by Prince Bernhardt himself which is not a coincidence). That evidence is also hyperlinked within the above text and which you can read here: https://widgets.weforum.org/history/1973.html
The concept of "universal entropy" was treated by myself and many other researchers over the course of many generations. Recently, I authored a five part series on the topic called 'Is the Universe Governed by Death or Life' which treats it at some length.
You may find that five part series relatively easily using this link: https://strategic-culture.org/contributors/matthew-ehret/
"Entropy" as far as it was defined by Sadi Carnot as a function of heat powered machines losing the potential to do work over time as energy is lost irreversably, is not disputed as a phenomenon that applies to any closed system, but it IS disputed as far as anyone attempts to impose it onto the entirety of the universe which exhibits qualitative states that could not exist were entropy assumed to be universal.
For instance, how would you address the presence of the golden section in the geometry of living systems as well as organizational structure of planetary orbits as demonstrated by Kepler?
Also how would you begin to explain how the assumption of "universal entropy" can co-exist with alongside the evidence of qualitative transformations from non life a planet shaped by living matter? Or what about non-conscious living matter to the discontinuous appearance of living matter? Or what about the appearance of conscious thinking matter out of the continuous stream of living systems exhibiting no such access to self-awareness, understanding of causality etc?
Perhaps you believe this to be a function of chance, and if so, then I feel bad for you.
Or perhaps you don't think such questions are worthy of your time, and if so I also would feel bad for you.
But perhaps you have given it some honest thought and care about such questions, and if so, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.
I am in concordant agreement. There are vast quantities of resources in the universe to be used but they are limited by the intellectual potential of our species. Ten billion Indians and Africans are not going to change the trajectory of life on this planet. I have heard modest proposals of thorium reactors and thermal nuclear fusion but they seem to be not politically viable or still immature in development. Why do smarter birds migrate less during the winter? Why have humans flourished? We construct an insensitive environment that is non-variable, which significantly dropped child mortality. Unfortunately we will soon pay the price for an inverted population pyramid and an increasing standard of living amongst eight billion, I do not want 10 chinas on this earth where I must drink cancerous water and food. With unlimited energy it is not a concern of course as any inefficient process could be driven to reverse or forward direction, such as breaking things down to their subatomic components and reconstructing them back up. Nevertheless an advanced civilization requires higher energetic needs and consumption per capita. No self sustaining system can indefinitely maintain its processes without a selection function to what may be deemed to be useful to itself, like homeostatic control. Cognition must be pursued to the highest degree so that information and knowledge can be harnessed to better exploit the universe’s abundance, so I disagree with whatever thesis is put here.