How Darwin, Huxley, and the Esalen Institute launched the 2012 and psychedelic revolutions – and began one of the largest mind control operations in history.

Share

How Darwin, Huxley, and the Esalen Institute launched the 2012 and psychedelic revolutions –

and began one of the largest mind control operations in history.

Some brief notes.

By Jan Irvin

August 28, 2012

Updated March 30, 2013.

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

My investigation into Thomas Henry Huxley’s background (grandfather to Aldous and Julian) reveals him as THE KEY promoter of Darwin’s theories, who was his friend and teacher, and through Huxley’s “X Club” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club) they created academics who would promote Darwin’s ideas (not coincidentally, spin offs of this “X-Club” include the X-men comic series (on eugenics and evolution) and Fourth World comics (on mind control) by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby – the “Forth World” being tied to the UN’s Agenda 21 (See the UN’s website – http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/) and (UNCED) Fourth World Wilderness – “battle for the mind” – conferences (http://youtu.be/JUdgiehz9dU). My feeling is that the word “X” for MDMA is directly related. X-files? Possibly many others.). Later Julian Huxley would take up his grandfather’s stance in promoting Darwin’s theory, eugenics/humanism, etc, publishing nearly a dozen books on these topics. Aldous would follow suit via his novels.

On contemplating the idea of why Sir Thomas Henry Huxley would name his club the “X-Club” that was used to promote Darwin’s theories and eugenics, it hadn’t originally crossed my mind that I had done a lot of research on the topic of “X” for my first book, about 8 years ago. In Astrotheology & Shamanism, pp. 152-153, we wrote:

“X marks the spot” is common symbolic usage. In fact, it is universal symbolism. The mark is associated with the perfect man in Psalms 37:37. “Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of man is peace.” The mark of the archetypal “perfect man” is the cross. The cross is an upright X. In Ezekiel, a mark is set upon the foreheads of selected men in Jerusalem and all other men, women, and children are to be slaughtered.

Ezekiel 9:6
Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.

The irony here is twofold: 1) that Huxley and Darwin are using a biblical reference for the club in which they promote Darwin’s ideas, and 2) Their plan for eugenics is now laid bare for all the world to see.

The Darwins eventually married into the Huxley family: Charles Darwin > George Howard Darwin > Charles Galton Darwin > George Pember Darwin (great grandson) – marries Angela Huxley – Aldous’s niece (Thomas Huxley’s great granddaughter).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huxley_family

The Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin of Piltdown Hoax fame, a major influence of hippie story teller Terence McKenna, also created the Habit and Novelty / Time wave zero concept, which he called “The Omega Point” – but without the 2011/2012 end point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_Point

“Omega Point is a term coined by the French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955) to describe a maximum level of complexity and consciousness towards which he believed the universe was evolving.”

Not coincidently, at the end of the above video regarding UNCED, we hear none other than Edmund de Rothschild himself cite Tielhard regarding his views on this.

Tielhard, who’s a key suspect for creating the Piltdown Hoax, the largest academic scandal in history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man), also (along with CIA agent, Prof. Michael Coe, at Yale – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Coe) influenced Terence’s ideas of 2012 and the end of time. Not coincidentally, Coe and William Burroughs came up with the idea around the same time. Coe, aside from being CIA, is married to Sophie – the daughter of eugenicist Theodosius Dobzhansky – who was tied closely with Julian Huxley, and Julian and Theodosius even signed the Eugenics Manifesto together (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_manifesto). Coe and Theodosius had close relations.

INTERVIEWER
Do you admire Mr. Luce?

BURROUGHS
I don’t admire him at all. He has set up one of the greatest word and image banks in the world. I mean, there are thousands of photos, thousands of words about anything and everything, all in his files. All the best pictures go into the files. Of course, they’re reduced to microphotos now. I’ve been interested in the Mayan system, which was a control calendar. You see, their calendar postulated really how everyone should feel at a given time, with lucky days, unlucky days, et cetera. And I feel that Luce’s system is comparable to that. It is a control system. It has nothing to do with reporting. Time, Life, Fortune is some sort of a police organization.
http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/4424/the-art-of-fiction-no-36-william-s-burroughs

The ORIGINS of this idea that we’re evolving through psychedelics, et al, can be traced from Darwin and Thomas Huxley to Julian and Aldous Huxley, directly to the Esalen Institute, and from there we can trace the 2012 tie-in aspect to Coe at Yale in his 1966 book on the Maya, and to Tielhard’s Omega point theory. Coe’s book is now in it’s 8th edition:

http://www.amazon.com/Eighth-Edition-Ancient-Peoples-Places/dp/0500289026/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1346174459&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=michael+coe+secrets+maya

And then it can be traced to the In Search of TV program, which we’ll cover in a moment, and then on to Terence McKenna and Jose Arguelles.

Tielhard also influenced Terence’s ideas of the Stoned Ape theory: I suggest that with the many ties to Tielhard’s ideas found in McKenna’s work regarding the end of time and human evolution, and right back to Julian Huxley and Darwin, that we can tie McKenna’s idea of the Stoned Ape theory directly to the Piltdown Hoax and the Huxleys, and their secret agenda at making any and every attempt to prove “Darwin’s” theory of evolution, whom Thomas Huxley was the key promoter, and Julian after him. And not coincidentally, both Thomas and Julian Huxley were presidents of the Royal Society, and not coincidentally gave themselves and their friends (including Darwin) Copley and Darwin awards.

“… and since I feel pretty much around friends and fringies here (laughter), it doesn’t trouble me to confess that my book, Food of the Gods, I really conceived of as an intellectual Trojan horse. It’s written as though it were a scientific study. Footnotes, bibliography, citations of impossible to obtain books and so forth and so on (crowd really laughs now). But this is simply to assuage and ?calm? the academic anthropologists. The idea is to leave this thing on their doorstep. Rather like an abandoned baby or a Trojan horse.”
~ Terence McKenna [emphasis added] (starts at: 1:12: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuhrhT8Z5QA)

See also Dr. Brian Akers’ refutation of McKenna’s Stoned Ape theory where McKenna provably falsified his citations in Food of the Gods: http://www.realitysandwich.com/terence_mckennas_stoned_apes

Not coincidently, Tielhard also wrote a book with Julian Huxley’s introduction:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Phenomenon-Of-Man-ebook/dp/B004HW7BZE

Via the Esalen Institute this multi-generational plan to “evolutionize” ( – their idea of evolution was just for them and the elites, not the rest of society whom they planned to dumb down and exterminate via their ideas laid forth in their many published books and programs on eugenics and humanism.) much of humanity was pushed forth via Aldous – with the help of Michael Murphy and Dick Price, with other connections to the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and the Tavistock Institute and many intelligence agencies, and other, similar sorts of mind control connections, such as with B.F. Skinner – creator of operant conditioning and “the Skinner box” (Esalen even brags of his time there! – http://www.esalen.org/assets/pdfs/friendsnewsletter/FriendsofEsalen-V1402.pdf) [Esalen has recently removed this newsletter. I’ve placed a copy here: www.gnosticmedia.com/txtfiles/FriendsofEsalen-V1402.pdf], who worked with the infamous Prof. Henry A. Murray at Harvard of MKULTRA fame. Dr. Tim Leary worked under Murray, and the infamous Dr. Ted Kaczynski, “the Unabomber”, was a part of Prof. Murray’s experiments. Dr. Kaczynski had attempted to shut those at SRI working on ARPANET and these other mind control / spying systems, down ( see The Net – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doQAwLb-DEE). Not coincidentally, it appears that Dick Price also studied in Murray’s department at Harvard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Price

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Department_of_Social_Relations

But this whole entire thing can be traced to the Huxley family – ALL of it.

From the above we trace this 2012 meme lineage to the In Search Of TV program (season 2, ep. 4 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNqOkpbv4xI) where they say in the closing minutes that 2011/2012 may be used to bring in a world government (it started out as the 2011 meme but was later changed to 2012).

“The ancient Mayans, men of knowledge, conceived their time on earth, their cycle of civilization to be 5200 years.  Beginning their calendar Aug 12 3113 BC they predicted that on December 24, 2011 AD, a cataclysmic earthquake would terminate their cycle of civilization. New men of knowledge would then appear to fight the forces of evil and lead the people to create a World Government.  If the Mayan men of knowledge were right in just 34 years we may learn the answers to some of the ancient Mayan mysteries.” ~ Leonard Nimoy, In Search Of TV program (season 2, ep. 4)

And from there it’s picked up by Terence McKenna, also working at Esalen and tied directly to the Huxleys:

“He [Terence] knew Francis Huxley, an anthropologist and one of Julian’s two sons. The other, Anthony, was a botanist.  Francis lived in Santa Fe and we knew him through personal circles there. Though how well Terence knew him, I have no idea. Not well. I only met him once or twice myself, so it was more of an acquaintanceship than a friendship. Laura, of course, was Aldous wife and was a beloved figure in the psychedelic community as a result.  I’m sure she probably hung out at Esalen and may have been there when T was there, which was regularly in the 80s and 90s.”
~ Dennis McKenna

So here we see that Terence even hung out with Francis Huxley, son to Julian Huxley. And of course Julian is one of the key suspects in this entire investigation. Coincidence? We also see that Terence likely spent extensive time at Esalen while Laura Huxley was there. Again, coincidence? Coincidentally, Terence’s archives were destroyed in a fire – at Esalen’s business offices in Monterrey, California. While official reports say that the fire started in an adjacent Quiznos, I can’t help but see the convenience and irony, especially when considering the magnitude of such an operation. Just some of the “coincidences” we’re dealing with here:

Is it coincidence that Terence would hang out with the great grandson of one of the key promoters of Darwin’s theories, Francis Huxley (1), who had ties via his own family to Darwin’s via his cousin (2), and was influenced heavily by Tielhard (3) – who created the Piltdown Hoax (4) – who happened also to have an intro in his book written by Julian Huxley (5), Francis’s father (6), and should then come up with the Stoned Ape theory (7), and promote it and the 2012 meme that was developed by a CIA agent, Coe (8), who just so happened to hang out with a friend of Julian’s, Dobhzanski (9), and then dispense the entire meme from Esalen (10), where he spent time with Aldous’s wife, Laura (11), and Esalen happens to be co-created by Aldous Huxley himself (12)?

12 coincidences, and that’s not even counting all of the other ties mentioned above to the Huxleys and Darwin, and those below, that will total up to about 40 coincidences!

(note: At this point those who can still maintain this many coincidences and still not see an agenda should have their heads checked – as this many coincidences is statistically impossible.)

It’s also picked up by Jose Arguelles, not coincidentally also at Esalen, and pushed forth until he dies, but not before Daniel Pinchbeck (as he admits, his last name, “possibly coincidentally”, means “fools gold”) picks up the 2012 torch and carries it on.

The ties between Darwin, Thomas Huxley, Julian, and Aldous (the Brave New World), down to Pierre Tielhard de Chardin, and Michael Coe and Theodosius Dobhzanski to Esalen, and down to Terence McKenna are incredible to contemplate, especially when considering that Aldous was a key founder of the Esalen institute, and Esalen has been a key promoter in using psychedelics for “evolution” all the while hiding the Huxley family’s deep connections to eugenics, humanism, et al. (for those who don’t know, humanism is the practice the elites use to get we the slaves to give up our autonomy to the greater religion of statism – ultimately them.)

Wrightwood, California.
21 October, 1949

Dear Mr. Orwell,

[…]

May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution?

The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual’s psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf.

[…]

My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.

I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government.

***Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.***

Another lucky accident was Freud’s inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.

This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.

But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.

Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
~ Aldous Huxley [emphasis added] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111440/Aldous-Huxley-letter-George-Orwell-1984-sheds-light-different-ideas.html

And when we realize that ALL of the players center around the Huxleys and Esalen, we have one of those “oh fuck” moments.

http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-675

To repeat the last two paragraphs of Aldous Huxley’s letter:

But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.

Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
~ Aldous Huxley [emphasis added] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111440/Aldous-Huxley-letter-George-Orwell-1984-sheds-light-different-ideas.html


The role of drugs in the exercise of political control is also coming under increasing discussion. Control can be through prohibition or supply. The total or even partial prohibition of drugs gives the government considerable leverage for other types of control. An example would be the selective application of drug laws permitting immediate search, or “no knock” entry, against selected components of the population such as members of certain minority groups or political organizations.

But a government could also supply drugs to help control a population. This method, foreseen by Aldous Huxley in Brave New World (1932), has the governing element employing drugs selectively to manipulate the governed in various ways.

To a large extent the numerous rural and urban communes, which provide a great freedom for private drug use and where hallucinogens are widely used today, are actually subsidized by our society. Their perpetuation is aided by parental or other family remittances, welfare, and unemployment payments, and benign neglect by the police. In fact, it may be more convenient and perhaps even more economical to keep the growing numbers of chronic drug users (especially of the hallucinogens) fairly isolated and also out of the labor market, with its millions of unemployed. To society, the communards with their hallucinogenic drugs are probably less bothersome-and less expensive-if they are living apart, than if they are engaging in alternative modes of expressing their alienation, such as active, organized, vigorous political protest and dissent. […] The hallucinogens presently comprise a moderate but significant portion of the total drug problem in Western society. The foregoing may provide a certain frame of reference against which not only the social but also the clinical problems created by these drugs can be considered.

~ Louis Jolyon West, Hallucinations: Behavior, Experience, and Theory. 1975. p. 298 ff.

Right now we can’t prove that McKenna was an agent, but he was most certainly, at least, a willful idiot. However, here is an interesting episode regarding McKenna being chased by Interpol and the FBI – from which no conclusion is ever mentioned. As Henk from Europe emailed me after this original article was published:

In 1969, McKenna traveled to Nepal led by his “interest in Tibetan painting and hallucinogenic shamanism.”[6] During his time there, he studied the Tibetan language and worked as a hashish smuggler, until “one of his Bombay-to-Aspen shipments fell into the hands of U. S. Customs.” He was forced to move to avoid capture by Interpol.[6] He wandered through Southeast Asia viewing ruins, collected butterflies in Indonesia, and worked as an English teacher in Tokyo. He then went back to Berkeley to continue studying biology, which he called “his first love”.[6]

Note he fled to avoid capture by Interpol but then after a time he casually returns to Berkeley?

True Hallucinations page 166: “This decision to depart California (Henk:and return to the Amazon) was hailed by my circle in Berkeley. Concern for my mental state was rife among my friends, and rumor had reached us that the FBI was aware that I was somewhere back inside the country and had begun looking for me.”

First of all, why would Terence friends hail the idea of him returning to the Amazon because they were concerned about his mental state while the cause of his mental state was his prior trip to the Amazon? That’s a contradiction. Why would Terence make up a reason to go back to the Amazon? Him being wanted by the FBI should be plenty reason I think.

Attempts to get an answer from Terence’s brother, Dennis, regarding the above episode have failed. It seems they want us to believe that Terence just went from being wanted by Interpol and the FBI to just casually lecturing about psychedelics. What happened in the interim? Someone must know the answer.

Here is what McKenna had to say in his own words regarding humanism, feminism, transhumanism, and eugenics – “the limiting of male birth”, from the following Youtube video with Terence “Speaking the Unspeakable” (begins at 1 hour 11 minutes – the Q&A):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IO7pHD3X9M

Terence McKenna from Speaking the Unspeakable: Maui, 1994. (“In Praise Of Psychedelics”)

Questioner 1:
Hi, I just wanted to know if you have heard about a book called The Mutant Message?

Terence McKenna:
No.

Questioner 1:
I want to tell you little bit about its because it’s very interesting. I think it follows what you’re been talking about. I love what your ideas about collective consciousness. And I think the book describes an aboriginal tribe in Australia that has been living the way in which you’re speaking, in a collective, and what they’ve come to the conclusion of is that they can no longer procreate. Because they have recognized that they can no longer exist on this planet. And the reason they call it the mutant message is they believe we are a mutant life form on this planet that is destroying it to the extent that they can no longer continue their lineage. And it’s an interesting concept, because it’s the first culture that I know of that has selectively chosen not to breed and along with your concept of raising our consciousness so that we understand the destructive nature of ourselves, what about a parallel vision of reducing our population as these people are. Of consciously choosing not to procreate at this time?

Terence McKenna:

Well it’s interesting that you brought this up. Yes, I’ve been saying for some time that, ***the mushroom pointed this out to me***, if every woman had only one child the population of the planet would fall 50% in 40 years. 50% in 40 years – without war, revolution, coercion, anything else. Now when you suggest this to people they say, well didn’t they try that in China and it failed?. Yes. But you have to think about a couple of things. First of all a child born to a woman in Maui or Malibu or Manhattan, that child will use between 800 and 1000 times more resources in its lifetime than a child born to a woman in Bangladesh. Why do we preach birth control in Bangladesh? We should be preaching it on Maui, Manhattan and Malibu. Because the women in those places are highly educated, socially responsible, global people. And therefore are the population most likely to respond to this suggestion. If 15% of the women in the high-tech industrial democracies were to to limit their childbearing to one child, within 10 years certain pressure indicators on the planet would begin to move away from the red and into the black.

So I think that we have got to think with this question of population. There are clearly too many people. And one woman, one child, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a psychedelic advocate, to understand the impact of that. If the population of the earth was cut in half everybody alive would be twice as wealthy. It’s possible in 120 years that we could reduce the world’s population to a billion very healthy, very comfortable, very well educated people.

Ok, that’s part of what ***the mushroom said***. And that may seem radical and some circles, but not here perhaps. It also said something else which I rarely mention, ***but since you brought it up***, there are not only too many people, there are too many men [laughter]. And ***I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth***. It’s very rare in mammal populations that you have a 50-50 ratio of male to female and in fact it’s well-known that male infants are less robust than female infants. And the reason why we have a 50-50 sexual ratio is because we artificially support males, and withdraw all resources from females. I suspect in the high Paleolithic the ratio is closer to 2 to 1 [unsupported – see citations]. And my supposition and thinking about this is that probably the best ratio is about this is 3 to 1. This is the way to feminize the human race if you’re serious. This is the way to advance women if you’re serious. Then what you have is less men, women whose dedication to the reproductive activities is confined in time to the amount of time it takes to raise only one child. This would be tremendously salutary to our problems. I’ve never heard it advocated even by the most radical, lesbian feminist, yada yada. I’ve never heard anyone say male birth should be limited. But it obviously should. And through amniocentesis* and this sort of thing we can steer ourselves toward a population with the predominance of females and those females should have only one child. And 75% of those children should also be female. And I don’t consider myself a gung ho feminist. I mean, ***I’m a feminist*** [feminism has been entirely disproved – by women – see my interview with Karen of Girl Writes What], but I don’t read the literature, or try to understand all of the factions and theories. ***AS A HUMANIST I advocate a reduction in male birth.*** It just seems obvious that that’s the way to go [regarding the current practice of poisoning the male population, see my interview with Curtis Duncan]. If it doesn’t seem obvious to you then let’s have an a public debate about it, and at least make it part of the rhetoric of the culture that this is an option for people to think about.

Terence McKenna quotes:

“The Mushroom said. […] But since you brought it up. […] I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth. […] This is the way to feminize the human race. […] I’m a feminist. […] AS A HUMANIST I advocate a reduction in male birth.”
~ Terence McKenna

Is Terence actually trying to claim that the mushrooms wanted to promote eugenics and tyrannous government policies, taxes, and medical and insurance policies specifically against men, and limiting male birth, the exact antithesis of the hideous communist policies in China? Are we to believe Terence that the mushrooms would promote more hatred and the murder/limiting of men and baby boys? Does a mother not naturally nurture her offspring? As someone else pointed out to me, what greater evil could there be than to put words like this in the mouth of the sacrament – the mushrooms? What care could the mushrooms possibly have in tyrannical, communist government policies that promote hatred against half the population? Notice how Terence says the mushrooms said, but then switches it to “I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies…”. Nice try, Terence.

And what is all of this feminism and humanist stuff? Please listen to the following interviews:

My interview with Karen of Girl Writes What:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/karen-of-girlwriteswhat-interview-the-femanist-fallacy-146/

My interview with Curtis Duncan:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/curtis-duncan-interview-the-conspiracy-to-feminize-males-masculinize-females-149/

After you’ve listened to both of those interviews, I think you’ll be fully well informed to see what McKenna’s agenda is.

Please don’t write me about these articles until you’ve studied the citations and read through the provided database.
Thank you.

For those of you who’d like to hear Terence in his own words, it begins at 1 hour 11 minutes:

Learn about Julian Huxley’s Humanism here:

World Evolutionary Humanism, Eugenics and UNESCO Pt 1 – On Julian Huxley

World Evolutionary Humanism, Eugenics and UNESCO Pt 2 – On Julian Huxley

On Eugenics and Julian Huxley:

UNESCO – It’s Evil Purpose and Philosophy

Alan Watt on Julian Huxley and UNESCO:

  193 comments for “How Darwin, Huxley, and the Esalen Institute launched the 2012 and psychedelic revolutions – and began one of the largest mind control operations in history.

  1. August 28, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    McKenna was so broke when he got a brain tumour his friends clubbed together to pay for his medical care.

    Recently about a year or so ago when I was wanting to try DMT a series of people came into my life who had all directly or indirectly known McKenna.

    It’s a good post and I’m not unattached to some of its themes but I’m not attached to all of them either. In my view the Esalen Huxley connection is the strongest theme.

  2. August 28, 2012 at 9:57 pm

    Wow! Powerful article Jan. Thank you! Is there nothing in our lives the Elite have not made popular? Alan Watt of cuttingthroughthematrix.com has many times spoken about how Plato said all culture has to be created from the top down (for the Elite to stay in control and they create a high moral culture when they are building up a society and want stability and when they want to destroy a society they create a culture low moral culture with pornography, pedophilia and bestiality. People think they create culture but that is not so.

    Look at these two articles of how even the music and other top music icons were created by the elite:

    1. http://www.infowars.com/inside-the-lc-the-strange-but-mostly-true-story-of-laurel-canyon-and-the-birth-of-the-hippie-generation-part-1

    2. The Beatles — Illuminati Mind Controllers

    http://www.henrymakow.com/beatles_were_mind_control.html
    (The original cover of the 1966 “Yesterday and Today” album: Beatles got a good laugh from abortion.) The Beatles were an Illuminati creation. Their songs were written for them and handlers scripted their actions and words.They demonstrate that popular culture is really mind control. By David Richards(henrymakow.com)

  3. Jan Irvin
    August 28, 2012 at 11:33 pm

    Matthew just posted this in the Frater X interview:

    INTERVIEWER
    Do you admire Mr. Luce?

    BURROUGHS
    I don’t admire him at all. He has set up one of the greatest word and image banks in the world. I mean, there are thousands of photos, thousands of words about anything and everything, all in his files. All the best pictures go into the files. Of course, they’re reduced to microphotos now. I’ve been interested in the Mayan system, which was a control calendar. You see, their calendar postulated really how everyone should feel at a given time, with lucky days, unlucky days, et cetera. And I feel that Luce’s system is comparable to that. It is a control system. It has nothing to do with reporting. Time, Life, Fortune is some sort of a police organization.

    http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/4424/the-art-of-fiction-no-36-william-s-burroughs

    haha… Frater X….

    • Vigilius
      August 29, 2012 at 8:33 pm

      The Paris Review is now known to have been a CIA propaganda rag.

      • August 30, 2012 at 1:12 am

        oh yeah? that’s interesting.
        source?

        I just finished reading ‘The Letters of William S. Burroughs: 1959-74,’ and got the impression that at various points in his life he was surrounded by, but extremely hostile to, what he calls in one letter “CIA-types.” He was literally trying to use words to undo control systems, and so i guess it’s no surprise the CIA would be interested.

        Does The Paris Review being “a CIA propaganda rag” affect your relationship with Burroughs’ words?

  4. noone
    August 29, 2012 at 1:16 am
  5. robert42
    August 29, 2012 at 6:11 am

    Good work, Jan.

    However, I don’t understand the implied significance of the Piltdown Man hoax. Its circumstances suggest that it was intended to be discovered as a hoax. I.e., that it was a prank. After all, surely an orangutan jawbone with a human skull would be found out eventually. The purpose of such a prank could, plausibly, have been either to embarrass the discoverer (Dawson) as incompetent, or to ridicule Darwin’s theory of evolution, but the LEAST likely motivation would have been to buttress the theory of evolution.

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 9:42 am

      Hi Robert,

      I don’t know how you confused it as having supposed to have been just a prank. It was a fraud – and a major one that last about 40 years in academic circles. It was a major academic scandal where they faked bones and all, creating the piltdown man as the missing link for Darwin’s theory.

      Obviously it wouldn’t have been a huge academic scandal if it was always intended as some sort of joke.

      Grammar?

      • robert42
        August 29, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        The grammar of an orangutan’s mandible with a human skull, with the mandible being treated with acid to “age” it. It was bound to come out eventually, leaving certain people looking foolish.

        They even later found a carved elephant bone in the same spot resembling a cricket bat. The relation of this to the headlines of the discovery being “the first prehistoric Englishman” is not too hard to see. Someone was having fun.

        • Michael Walker
          September 1, 2012 at 4:23 am

          Unfortunately you dont overstand, you understand Robert. This is your problem & Jan would have to spend sometime directing you to the correct conclusion because you have alot to study before you overstand. I suggest spending a few weeks worth of listening to Jan’s podcasts. Maybe a new podcast from Jan on how Charles Darwin was one of the richest men in the world at the time, kept black woman as sex slaves, thought Irish people to be a lesser race. The whole ‘Theory of evolution’ is utter rubbish & he said so on his death bed. Jan is there any podcasts on how Albert Eindstein theories were promoted in social elite circles & how they can be refuted now?

          • robert42
            September 1, 2012 at 5:18 am

            You’re ASSuming too much, and your remarks seem to be irrelevant to mine. I’ve listened to every podcast at least once.

          • Jan Irvin
            September 1, 2012 at 5:26 pm

            There’s a book, very hard to get a hold of now, as just weeks ago the author’s website was forcefully removed from the internet. The book is called The Manufacture and Sale of St. Einstein.

    • September 21, 2012 at 12:19 pm

      As I see the incident, the damage had already been done when the hoax was found out.

      Here is an other example.

      In Francis Neilson’s book, titled Makers of War, he discloses many unsuspected and undisclosed reasons for the outbreak of World War I in Europe in August 1914. With reference to the alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex in the English Channel, Mr. Neilson emphasizes:

      “In America, Woodrow Wilson, desperate to find a pretext to enter the war, found it at last in the ‘sinking’ of the Sussex in mid-channel. Someone invented a yarn that American lives had been lost. With thus excuse he went to Congress for a declaration of war. Afterwards, the Navy found that the Sussex had not been sunk, and that no lives had been lost. The alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex was the figment of an over-worked Zionist imagination. The alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex was conceived in the imagination of a Zionist to facilitate the purpose planned and successfully executed.”

  6. robert42
    August 29, 2012 at 6:26 am

    Another point that I don’t understand (so maybe I’m a bit slow):

    There are two models of evolution in the mix here that seem quite at odds with one another. Darwin and Huxley argued for evolution by natural selection acting upon a pool of random mutations, with said evolution having the effect of greater adaptation of a biological species to its environment. New Age-ists, on the other hand, talk about “evolution” in more personal and teleological terms: that some divine intelligence is drawing us towards an ideal state, and that said evolution operates at the level of the individual choice rather than the species’ gene pool. Note that that latter concept of evolution is much closwer to Catholic doctrine. As a Jesuit priest, Teilhard is obviously philosophically closer to the latter, New Age, concept of evolution.

    So, I can’t see how Teilhard and the New Agers are compatible with Darwinian evolutionists. Just calling it “evolution” is hardly enough to establish the connection.

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 9:46 am

      Hi Robert, as you’re a regular member of T&H and all, I should hope that you’ve studied the brain database and all of the connections, and have at least reviewed the Huxley’s books?

      Maybe you’re confusing the ideas of evolution, which I clearly demarkated above: “( – their idea of evolution was just for them and the elites, not the rest of society whom they planned to dumb down and exterminate via their ideas laid forth in their many published books and programs on eugenics and humanism.)”

      How is using mind control to dumb down and subdue one group to kill them off at odds? Yes, the evolutionists had many debates over whether or not slavery was justified, etc. But we skip 2 generations – what Darwin / T. Huxley were selling, verses what Dobzhanski, Julian and the others were selling – eugenics and killing of the masses – the UNESCO program, also cited above, the Agenda 21 program also cited above, the 4th world also cited above…

      So you don’t see how something is so because? ?? ? grammar?

      • robert42
        August 29, 2012 at 11:22 am

        Hi Jan, thanks for your reply. No, I haven’t followed T&H in a while; just got tired of the cliquishness, and the yammerheads who spend all their waking time in the chatroom, and figured I had better things to do. Maybe I’ll post there again some time.

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 9:57 am

      I also said:

      “The ORIGINS of this idea that we’re evolving through psychedelics, et al, can be traced from Darwin and Thomas Huxley to Julian and Aldous Huxley, directly to the Esalen Institute, and from there we can trace the 2012 tie-in aspect to Coe at Yale in his 1966 book on the Maya (and also, probably not coincidently, William Burroughs just shortly before Coe), and to Tielhard’s Omega point theory. Coe’s book is now in it’s 8th edition:”

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 10:00 am

      This whole paragraph, aside from the title, should have made clear that this was about mind control and not evolution:

      “Via the Esalen Institute this multi-generational plan to “evolutionize” ( – their idea of evolution was just for them and the elites, not the rest of society whom they planned to dumb down and exterminate via their ideas laid forth in their many published books and programs on eugenics and humanism.) much of humanity was pushed forth via Aldous – with the help of Michael Murphy and Dick Price, with other connections to the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and the Tavistock Institute and many intelligence agencies, and other, similar sorts of mind control connections, such as with B.F. Skinner – creator of operant conditioning and “the Skinner box” (Esalen even brags of his time there! – http://www.esalen.org/assets/pdfs/friendsnewsletter/FriendsofEsalen-V1402.pdf), who worked with the infamous Prof. Henry A. Murray at Harvard of MKULTRA fame. Dr. Tim Leary worked under Murray, and the infamous Dr. Ted Kaczynski, “the Unabomber”, was a part of Prof. Murray’s experiments. Dr. Kaczynski had attempted to shut those at SRI working on ARPANET and these other mind control / spying systems, down ( see The Net – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doQAwLb-DEE). Not coincidently, it appears that Dick Price also studied in Murray’s department at Harvard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Price

      Please note “evolutionize” – in quotes… and the following explanation.

  7. robert42
    August 29, 2012 at 7:36 am

    “for those who don’t know, humanism is the practice the elites use to get we the slaves to give up our autonomy to the greater religion of statism – ultimately them.”

    That could be, in the modern, colloquial context. But I would be a little cautious lest one throw out the baby with the bathwater.

    We’ve seen how the “trivium” has, literally, been trivialized. I suspect that something similar happened to humanism.

    I’m still working my way through Will Durant’s “The Story of Civilization” (which I highly recommend), and I’m now halfway through the section entitled “The Renaissance.” So I’m coincidentally a little more familiar with the subject of humanism than I had been before.

    14th Century “humanism” was a reaction against the reigning educational tradition of “scholasticism” and it was a necessary component of the Italian Renaissance.

    Here is a survey of Renaissance Humanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_humanism

    Here’s a quote from the above Wikipedia entry:

    “It developed during the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth centuries, and was a response to the challenge of Mediæval scholastic education, emphasizing practical, pre-professional and scientific studies. Scholasticism focused on preparing men to be doctors, lawyers or professional theologians, and was taught from approved textbooks in logic, natural philosophy, medicine, law and theology.”

    And another:

    “Early Italian humanism, which in many respects continued the grammatical and rhetorical traditions of the Middle Ages, not merely provided the old Trivium with a new and more ambitious name (Studia humanitatis), but also increased its actual scope, content and significance in the curriculum of the schools and universities and in its own extensive literary production. The studia hunanitatis excluded logic, but they added to the traditional grammar and rhetoric not only history, Greek, and moral philosophy, but also made poetry, once a sequel of grammar and rhetoric, the most important member of the whole group.”

    Do you see anything interesting in the above two passages? The scholastics had grammar, logic and rhetoric, but narrowly applied, to “the professions.” The humanists said, no, education is for everyone and is a means of understanding the world, BUT they left out one piece: logic.

    Wow, that’s a bit (if you’ll pardon a slightly stretched analogy) like handing someone a loaded pistol and saying that you have a right to self-defence, but removing the firing pin first. The scholastic, on the other hand, leaves the firing pin in but says that the gun is only for military use.

    The big conflict over Plato versus Aristotle (e.g., Erasmus) during those centuries is now starting to make sense to me. Aristotle is simply a label for logic.

    So Scholasticism versus Renaissance Humanism is a false dichotomy or a false dialectic. Each leaves out part of the picture that would comprise human empowerment. But the discerning mind can reassemble the pieces in the correct configuration.

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 9:48 am

      Thanks, but I clearly never said anything about Renaissance humanism, and so therefore it would automatically fall to the modern context, which the article is clearly about.

      • robert42
        August 29, 2012 at 11:18 am

        Thanks for your response. I can see that the same word, humanism, is being used two for different things, depending on the era. I found the thinking-aloud exercise valuable because at the start of the message I’d assumed that Renaissance Humanism was good while modern humanism is bad, but in the course of writing it and rereading the link I arrived at a more nuanced understanding.

        • Jan Irvin
          August 29, 2012 at 12:07 pm

          Interesting on the trivium there, and how they left out logic, or the ability to spot lies.

          Yes, Aristotle is the founder of logic, and the modern scientific method. There’s been every effort to distort his work.

          Interesting also your analogy of the false dialectic. Indeed.

          And if you pay close attention, you’ll see that in fact the humanism in Italian universities was in fact this very humanism which I defined above… without logic they’re left to being completely controlled.

          Promoting poetry without logic would be synonymous with promoting sophism.

          • Joseph Pierce
            September 3, 2012 at 9:30 pm

            [Yes, Aristotle is the founder of logic]

            Incorrect. There are many types of “logic.” Furthermore, there is STILL debate on what exactly constitutes “logic.” Because, once again, you are forever dealing with criteria.

            BUT:

            [It’s fair to say that Aristotle invented deductive logic. (That’s not to say that no one had drawn inferences before Aristotle told them how to do so. Rather, he was the first to CODIFY inferences into a system, and to create rules for distinguishing correct from
            incorrect inferences.)] (emphasis mine)

            faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/433/​LogicIntro.pdf · PDF file

  8. Bill Semni
    August 29, 2012 at 10:07 am

    Pre-MKultra history: http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Cannon_2.pdf And, has anybody seen the not quite finished documentary “Power & Control LSD in the Sixties” by Aron Ranen ? Viewable at Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZdz0G4lG6k

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 11:41 am

      No I hadn’t. Thanks for sharing.

  9. Bill Semni
    August 29, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    And this guy is really funny too as he innocently tugs at the Salvia thread only to find some scoundrel light-being talking to him through the scrim….http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30mzNPT7aAU

  10. August 29, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    Awesome research Jan! Yeah I hope you checked out Jose Arguelles being launched in the Theosophist academic journal “Main Currents in Modern Thought” along with Ken Wilber and other New Age luminaries. I can directly document your expose on evolution being for the elite only as social Darwinism in the New Age community — this is quoted from the main philosopher for the theosophists in the U.S. but tied to the Princeton Institute of Advanced Study and the developer of the nuclear bomb. So it was called “radio-eugenics” at the time with the idea that — yeah we know from Hiroshima and Nagaski that even the next generation is born mutated but that’s how evolution works and with the proper application of radiation globally then a new type of human can be created. Then this was even promoted by Sri Aurobindo’s ashram — another U.N. official site. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_matrix43.htm I got all the details there.

    So like you mentioned Gregory Bateson being CIA MKultra LSD, Esalen and cybernetics “social systems theory” at the Macy Conference. Then SRI promoting Freemasonry as the Stargate Conspiracy reveals — have you listened to the Prince and Picknett podcasts on the Stargate Conspiracy and synarchy — the Sion Revelation? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMdpuo8vhEA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znky1_2eL-0 There’s more of them on youtube also.

    So yeah I do take this back to NeoPlatonism which was started in the 9th C. but then goes back to Plato and Archytas and then even further into the “symbolic revolution” of 10,000 BCE which is documented by Jacques Cauvin.

    We think of modernity as an acceleration of all of this but it’s really based on logarithmic mathematics. Dr Albert Bartlett: Arithmetic, Population and Energy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_VpyoAXpA8

    What’s your take on that lecture Jan – the first time I watched it I didn’t really pay attention because it seems out-dated and simplistic. But really listen to what he’s saying – the math speaks for itself. So my take on this is that the mathematics is the actual conspiracy — and the culture based on the mathematics. We are taught that math is “pure” but this is not true.

    I posted your above article link and title over on realitysandwich.com but the editors there say they’re at burning man. haha.

    • Jan Irvin
      August 29, 2012 at 1:24 pm

      Thanks, Drew.

    • David Llewellyn Foster
      September 6, 2012 at 10:34 am

      Drew, I agree with you about the Al Bartlett classic. Things that grow without restraint are like the 300 or so types of disease we call cancer, when cells divide and proliferate beyond the body’s immune control. Unlimited industrial growth will kill us all in the same way.

      I do take issue with your dating of NeoPlatonism though. C9th would place its development post-Islam. The C2nd of the common era would be more like it. There are several websites focusing on classical theurgy and the history of magick, for example this one that discusses the influence of the Syrian Iamblichus…

      http://chasinghermes.com/2010/02/20/-16-neoplatonism-and-the-theurgy-of-iamblichus.aspx

  11. Jan Irvin
    August 29, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    A related & interesting connection… from Eustace Mullins’ “The Secrets of the Federal Reserve”; Appendix I (page 183 -185 in my hard copy; page 207- 208 in the SCRIBD online PDF):

    “Psychological Warfare

    Few Americans know that almost every development in psychology in the
    United States in the past sixty-five years has been directed by the Bureau of
    Psychological Warfare of the British Army.

    A short time ago, the present writer learned a new name, The Tavistock Institute of London,

    also known as the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations. “Human relations” covers every
    aspect of human behavior, and it is the modest goal of the Tavistock Institute to obtain and
    exercise control over every aspect of human behavior of American citizens.

    Because of the intensive artillery barrages of World War I, many soldiers
    were permanently impaired by shell shock. In 1921, the Marquees of
    Tavistock, 11th Duke of Bedford, gave a building to a group which planned
    to conduct rehabilitation programs for shell shocked British soldiers. The
    group took the name of “Tavistock Institute” after its benefactor.

    The General Staff of the British Army decided it was crucial that they determine
    the breaking point of the soldier under combat conditions. The Tavistock
    Institute was taken over by Sir John Rawlings Reese, head of the British
    Army Psychological Warfare Bureau. A cadre of highly trained specialists in
    psychological warfare was built up in total secrecy.

    In fifty years, the name “Tavistock Institute’ appears only twice
    in the Index of the New York Times,
    yet this group, according to LaRouche and other authorities, organized and
    trained the entire staffs of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the
    Strategic Bombing Survey, Supreme Headquarters of the Allied
    Expeditionary Forces, and other key American military groups during
    World War II. During World War II, the Tavistock Institute combined with
    the medical sciences division of the Rockefeller Foundation for esoteric
    experiments with mind-altering drugs. The present drug culture of the
    United States is traced in its entirety to this Institute, which supervised the
    Central Intelligence Agency’s training programs.

    The “LSD counter culture” originated when Sandoz A.G., a Swiss pharmaceutical house
    owned by S.G. Warburg & Co., developed a new drug from lysergic acid, called
    LSD. James Paul Warburg (son of Paul Warburg who had written the
    Federal Reserve Act in 1910), financed a subsidiary of the Tavistock Institute
    in the United States called the Institute for Policy Studies, whose director,
    Marcus Raskin, was appointed to the National Security Council. James Paul
    Warburg set up a CIA program to experiment with LSD on CIA agents,
    some of whom later committed suicide. This program, MK-Ultra, supervised
    by Dr. Gottlieb, resulted in huge lawsuits against the United States
    Government by the families of the victims.

    The Institute for Policy Studies set up a campus subsidiary, Students for
    Democratic Society (SDS), devoted to drugs and revolution. Rather than
    finance SDS himself, Warburg used CIA funds, some twenty million dollars, to
    promote the campus riots of the 1960s.

    The English Tavistock Institute has not restricted its activities to left-wing
    groups, but has also directed the programs of such supposedly
    “conservative” American think tanks as the Herbert Hoover Institute at
    Stanford University, Heritage Foundation, Wharton, Hudson, Massachusetts
    Institute of Technology, and Rand. The “sensitivity train-
    ing” and “sexual encounter” programs of the most radical California groups
    such as Esalen Institute and its many imitators were all developed and
    implemented by Tavistock Institute psychologists.

    One of the rare items concerning the Tavistock Institute appears in Business
    Week, Oct. 26, 1963, with a photograph of its building in the most expensive
    medical offices area of London. The story mentions “the Freudian bias” of
    the Institute, and comments that it is amply financed by British blue-chip
    corporations, including Unilever, British Petroleum, and Baldwin Steel.
    According to Business Week, the psychological testing programs and group
    relations training programs of the Institute were implemented in the United
    States by the University of Michigan and the University of California, which
    are hotbeds of radicalism and the drug network.

    It was the Marquees of Tavistock, 12th Duke of Bedford, whom Rudolf Hess
    flew to England to contact about ending World War II. Tavistock was said to
    be worth $40 million in 1942. In 1945, his wife committed suicide by taking
    an overdose of pills.”

    • Vigilius
      August 29, 2012 at 8:39 pm

      Stanford Research Institute is the American version of Tavistock, imo.

  12. Bill Semni
    August 29, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    I thought it was the Duke of Hamilton that Rudy was trying to get in touch with wasn’t it ? The Duke of Bedford’s wife, however, sued him in 1935 for “restitution of conjugal rights.” Hmmmmm….He claimed she was sweet on their son’s tutor so he wasn’t responsible for any duties. He left. She then swallowed pills in ’45, commiting suicide. Then in ’53 he seems to have shot himself accidentally at one of the family’s homes. Aaah, the Brits.

  13. Vigilius
    August 29, 2012 at 8:36 pm

    As I recall, Teilhard Chardin’s “Omega Point” was more of a Hegelian thing.

  14. Pacal
    August 29, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    Hi Jan Irvin, Where does the McKenna brother’s (Home Cultivation of Magic Mushrooms 1975)& his(The Mushroom Speaks book intro) fit into this Mayan 2012 Mushroom-Stones Theme.? and John Major Jenkin’s work with the 2012 shamanic-plant/mushroom/toad using center at IZAPA where the long count 5125 year cycle originated.?Psilocybin Mushrooms(taken anywhere it TIME) = December 21 2012 Meme?The Mayans,McKenna TimeWave ..please comment GREAT WORK JAN IRVIN

    • Jan Irvin
      August 30, 2012 at 9:27 am

      That’s a very good question and something I’ve been considering. I think that the MMGG was co-opted for stage 2 of MKULTRA – though that may be a bit naive and wishful thinking on my part. Dennis is a friend of mine and I just have a really hard time believing that he could have been intentionally a part of anything. That, at least for Dennis’s part, their work was co-opted. At this point I can’t speak for Terence. He did go to the Tussman experimental college that has some interesting connections, and I wonder if that’s where they got to him.

      I’ve not spoken with Jenkin’s yet about this. I need to call him. It seems to me that there was an intentional effort to merge the two.

      Here’s an interesting article: http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/4424/the-art-of-fiction-no-36-william-s-burroughs

      INTERVIEWER

      Do you admire Mr. Luce?

      BURROUGHS

      I don’t admire him at all. He has set up one of the greatest word and image banks in the world. I mean, there are thousands of photos, thousands of words about anything and everything, all in his files. All the best pictures go into the files. Of course, they’re reduced to microphotos now. I’ve been interested in ***the Mayan system, which was a control calendar. You see, their calendar postulated really how everyone should feel at a given time***, with lucky days, unlucky days, et cetera. And I feel that Luce’s system is comparable to that. It is a control system. It has nothing to do with reporting. Time, Life, Fortune is some sort of a police organization.

  15. Myles
    August 30, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    Off on a bit of a weird tangent I know, but one of my favorite podcasts, we hate movies once commented, “all of the X men stories end in death camps, all of them!”. Well this definitely explains a few things.

  16. D.K.B.
    August 30, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    Being an amateur researcher of digital sociology (and memetic ecology) myself, this information comes to me as no surprise.

    I’ve certainly noticed an emerging (and concerning) trend in terms of the apparent increase of psychedelic ‘believers’, especially due to both – the current ‘2012’ meme and, the late Mr. Mckenna’s spoken lectures (now propagated through mediums such as Youtube).

    The idea that such phenomenon ‘happen by accident’ is a supremely naïve notion.

    Possibly it is time for an ‘intervention’ of sorts? Maybe some ‘tough love’ in the form of a rigorous exposure of the ‘psychedelic movement’ and it’s protagonists motives; the true history of it’s ascendancy within the popular culture and it’s inevitable decline.

    I’d like to recommend a few sites (amongst the list grows daily) for confirmation of my assertions –

    http://www.mckennaforum.com

    http://www.youtube.com/user/TerenceMcKennaTube

    http://www.reddit.com/r/terencemckenna

    I hope this is of some use. Mr Irvin’s assertions strike me as a ‘call to arms’ in terms of the necessary process of recovering the minds already immersed within a counter-culture that, I believe, should be revealed for what is really is.

    I apologise if my opinions appear terse, but I’d hoped to genuinely communicate my concern.

    Regards.

  17. D.K.B.
    August 30, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    I apologise for double posting but I’ve just this minute discovered that the aforementioned ‘mckennaforum’ already has an active thread discussing Jan Irvins revelations –

    http://mckennaforum.com/forum/mckenna-forum-group1/terence-mckenna-forum-forum24/jan-irvin-talking-smack-and-saying-jack-thread208/

    I also believe that the user ‘theblimp’ is infact the owner of –

    http://www.youtube.com/user/TerenceMcKennaTube

    • Jan Irvin
      August 30, 2012 at 6:14 pm

      Funny, they don’t even look at my evidence, they look at how many other people have signed on or not…

      An appeal to popularity: “It seems that Irvin hasn’t won many converts over on the comments section for his interview at RedIce’s facebook page…”

      Here’s a nice appeal to ridicule, and killing the messenger: “Just got through the part where he reads Wasson’s 1957 LIFE magazine article and seems to have confused reading aloud someone else’s words (badly) in a condescending and mocking fashion, as critique. His lack of ability as a communicator prevents me listening further and I’ll need to switch to reading his articles to see if he can manifest his claimed evidence.”

      Seems “theblimp” got his feathers ruffled. Too bad he can’t see past his fallacious nose.

      • robert42
        August 31, 2012 at 8:08 am

        “Funny, they don’t even look at my evidence, they look at how many other people have signed on or not…

        An appeal to popularity: “It seems that Irvin hasn’t won many converts over on the comments section for his interview at RedIce’s facebook page…” ”

        In order to comment, one would have to be signed up with Facebook or Youtube, which co-operate with intelligence agencies. So the commenters that do appear on those sites are, almost by definition, either unawake or malevolent.

      • D.K.B.
        August 31, 2012 at 8:34 am

        One more interesting thing I came across during a search on ‘Reddit.com’ was a very recent link to your work (to this very page in fact) –

        http://www.reddit.com/r/Psychonaut/comments/yzx9q/how_darwin_huxley_and_the_esalen_institute/

        Within the comments we find a blatantly obvious attempt to subvert any constructive discussion by the user ‘booper_trooper’. I decided to investigate his comment history (a useful function of ‘Reddit’) which can be found here –

        http://www.reddit.com/user/booper_trooper/

        Scroll down to the bottom to see his obvious affiliation to (suprise, suprise)…

        http://www.mckennaforum.com

        The hornets nest perhaps?

        • Jan Irvin
          August 31, 2012 at 10:05 am

          Great work, DKB. I really appreciate the grammar on these guys. We’ve clearly got them on the run. Let’s hit them full force with the momentum we’ve got built up. They’re scared.

  18. Jan Irvin
    August 30, 2012 at 5:18 pm

    A SHOCKING presentation by Terence McKenna from 1994. Start at 1 hour 11 minutes in – the question and answer. Consider Karen of Girl Writes What, and also Curtis Duncan’s recent interviews with me and then consider the above article and be prepared to be blown away.

    Listen to Terence, in his own words, promote eugenics, humanism, feminism, and totalitarian control:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IO7pHD3X9M

    • robert42
      August 31, 2012 at 7:40 am

      And McKenna said that his remarks were “what The Mushroom told me” which is an appeal to authority fallacy (the putative authority being either “The Mushroom” or McKenna himself as its prophet).

      • Joseph Pierce
        September 3, 2012 at 8:11 pm

        Hi Robert,

        How is “the mushroom told me” a direct logical fallacy? Ad verecundiam is about the UNQUESTIONABLE appeal to authority.

        Is a mushroom somehow fallacious like a human in logical constructs? Is a mushroom experience necessarily authoritarian?

        How do you KNOW, as in the Gnostic ‘gnosis,’ with any CERTAINTY, ANY CRITERION, that McKenna was fallacious when you yourself never had his experience?

        • robert42
          September 4, 2012 at 8:50 am

          It is an appeal to authority because he is implying that we should believe his claims on the basis that he is a special channel to divine knowledge. The whole presentation of McKenna, surrounded by attentive fans, is similar to that of other supposed religious authorities such as Mohammed (“God told me that your 9-year old daughter must marry me!”) or the (infallible) Pope.

          I just look at the situation and see the same format: some guy claims he has a hotline to God and that’s why he knows better than you. It’s as old an mankind.

          If it was a matter of taking the mushroom then why don’t we witness millions of nasal gurus ranting the same claims? We don’t.

          • Joseph Pierce
            September 4, 2012 at 9:07 am

            Of course it’s an appeal to authority.

            It gets problematic for people when they believe without questioning a coercive doctrine or law formulated for obedience, not so much appeal.

            Do you see the difference? In this world of maya, illusion, or holographic resonance, you will not live your life without passing through different doors of perception. Haha. Now brand me a heretic for using Huxley’s words. :)

            The thing about McKenna is that he didn’t always take himself seriously as an authority; in other words, a very experienced psychedelic user. He didn’t go around coercively with doctrines men ought to believe and live by; unlike Mohammed or the Pope via the Roman Church.

            We don’t witness “millions of nasal gurus ranting the same claims” because there are many different roads mystics take.

            Read for a good summary here on Active Mysticism: http://www.josephwaligore.com/new-age/active-mysticism/

            I’d recommend reading the whole site, as well. There’s some very relevant issues discussed that coincide on this site.

  19. robert42
    August 30, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    I see that Esalen is a Monarch Butterfly winter refuge: http://www.esalen.org/assets/pdfs/friendsnewsletter/FriendsofEsalen-V1301.pdf

    Monarch Programming is supposed to be another name for the CIA’s MK-Ultra, mind control project: http://secretarcana.com/hiddenknowledge/monarch-programming-mind-control/

    Coincidence? I can’t find any explanation for the origin of the association of the Monarch Butterfly (the insect) with the CIA program.

  20. David Llewellyn Foster
    August 31, 2012 at 3:08 am

    Getting closer to the eye of the storm Jan…

    • Joseph Pierce
      September 4, 2012 at 9:10 am

      Unfortunately, the “eye of the storm” moves when you do. :)

      • David Llewellyn Foster
        September 6, 2012 at 10:58 am

        not sure if I quite follow you there Joseph, is that a nod or a wink? Of course the storm moves as does the eye of the beholder. Do you mean a simulacrum that changes direction to deliberately deceive the beholder? My intention was metaphorical; its implication was to infer the complexities of the perennial controversies that persist about magick, because that is what this is all about really: the knowledge, skill and ethics of those who purport to understand the esoteric sciences the ancients called theurgy, but propose to inculcate into contemporary “profane” life. As for the “all-seeing eye” of the Egyptians so familiar to us as a symbol of freemasonry, in my opinion it is really an image of the Sun, the God of our local celestial system. perhaps you’d be interested in Greg Sams’ latest http://www.sunofgod.net/
        I haven’t read it myself yet, but several people have found it thought provoking…

  21. robert42
    August 31, 2012 at 4:33 am

    It might be useful to consider that there are probably degrees of “useful idiocy,” ranging from psycho-babbling hippies at the lowest level, to fully-aware criminals who create the big picture, at the highest level, with different levels of understanding (grammar AND logic) in between.

    For example, HG Wells was globalist. But when you look at why he favored a world government, it was because he thought that it was the only way to end war. As far as I can tell, he had no clue that the major wars of the last century (at least) were engineered by globalists who were at higher level than himself.

    Also, Wells’ conception of eugenics and evolution as pictured in The Time Machine is absurd and self-contradictory: The eloi no longer read books, while the bestial, subterranean morlochs had technology, and so must have had at least a servile education. But the story does not mention anyone having what we would call a liberal education, so it is unclear who directs the morlochs, which surely would have been the most interesting part of the story.

  22. Ryan Caron
    August 31, 2012 at 4:36 am

    Not sure if you’ve seen this lecture before Jan, but it’s quite interesting listening to Aldous speak.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn-QhBGP1ms

  23. Bill Watt
    August 31, 2012 at 10:02 am

    I used to go see Terence speak (And see if I could make him lose his place) just to watch that adnoidal bleat trance induction style voice coupled with the staring eyes doing it’s moves on everybody (there’s a Celtic word that means fanciful roguish fireside storyteller of the town). Amazing too how he could just keep going and going in that paced self-assured way. When the ministers do that voice it’s called “rolling,” I believe. He actually got famous by being aired (starting in ’83, roughly) on the Something’s Happening (KPFK-50,000 watts) show that ran from 12 midnite to 5 weekdays to L.A’s nocturnal millions. The books we’re cobbled extensions from those initial aired talks. I can’t help but think that at some point he got fried by the limelight and all it’s usual attendant seductions. Maybe when the raver kids in England started to invite him over (triple scorpio, ya know).

    • Jan Irvin
      August 31, 2012 at 10:08 am

      HI Bill, I’m aware of his stuff from Roy of Hollywood, and I’m the unfortunately guy who released all of that to the internet. See the She Who Remembers audio archives on the store page. One of the biggest mistakes I’ve ever made was releasing his material to the internet. Had I the trivium then, I’d have filtered his mental virus and never sent it down stream.

      The evidence is showing more and more that he was complicit. You’ll find that I’ve posted this link showing him discussing his eugenics, humanism and feminism directly:

      A SHOCKING presentation by Terence McKenna from 1994. Start at 1 hour 11 minutes in – the question and answer. Consider Karen of Girl Writes What, and also Curtis Duncan’s recent interviews with me and then consider the above article and be prepared to be blown away.

      Listen to Terence, in his own words, promote eugenics, humanism, feminism, and totalitarian control:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IO7pHD3X9M

  24. Bill Watt
    August 31, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    Yea…he started leaning into the Kurzweil camp for sure (High Frontiers, RU Sirius and all that). The long hoped for synergy of silicon and carbon was going to finally happen ! I too had been a gushing devotee. More for the rogue academic theatre of it all. And the strange creatures that would attend. I remember my girlfriend at the time smirking with ridicule. Dem tryptamines can put a real whammie on your head though. I wonder if he was somehow led to veer into that direction or maybe the muses had left the building ? I know initially Dennis had claimed not to remember any of the wilder goings on and was trying to get Terence to go back in the closet with the whole thing.

  25. Martyn George
    September 1, 2012 at 2:23 am

    Hi Folks,

    Just another tidbit from the great “Bard” himself.

    “there was a sense of incredibly accelerated change…..once I moved to Berkeley I noticed the large billboard……contained cryptic messages that were inevitably addressed to me and my affinity group……in short serious boundary disillusionment and category enscramblement was creeping into my mental universe (audience laughter)…..I had a very strange friend…..he still is my great inspiration. I wish I could coax him into public display because he is the REAL Terence Mckenna. But if you are the real Terence Mckenna you have too much good taste to ever do what I do (audience laughter)……in early 1967 he came to my house one rainy February night….he said….this is a material that has been boosted from an Army research project being run down at SRI (Stanford Research Institute)…someone managed to get a 50 gallon drum of this material out of the inventory without anybody knowing…I said what is it……he said its called DMT.” – Terence Mckenna Under the teaching tree, part 1 31:10-33:33

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HpIyFQxzgU

    Funny that Wikipedia defines a Bard as – “a professional poet, employed by a patron, such as a monarch or nobleman, to commemorate the patron’s ancestors and to praise the patron’s own activities.”

  26. September 1, 2012 at 8:27 am

    As for the path back through the Huxleys to Darwin, you might look into some of the NON-RELIGIOUS critiques of the theory of natural selection that are coming out. The Darwinian model is getting rickety, now that genomes are revealing themselves. This is significant for a lot of reasons, but maybe most pertinent here is that Darwinian theory, with its attendant tropes of “fitness,” “adaptation,” the culling of the weak, and so on, provides a foundational justification for eugenic policies. If the theory is seriously undercut, then those policies are, at least in theory, harder to justify.

    Good sourcebooks are
    What Darwin Got Wrong, by Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini

    The professors stage a frontal attack on the theory of natural selection. They peel apart the logic of the theory until nothing is left that can be called logical. Two insights I particularly like (my paraphrases): To say that phenotypes are adapted to their environments is simply to say that there are such phenotypes. -and – Natural selection at most can tune the piano; it cannot compose the melody.

    and

    Evolution – the Extended Synthesis, edited by Massimo Pigliucci and Gerd B. Müller

    This is a collection of papers from a conference held in 2008. The authors and editors are defenders of the faith, but can no longer abide by the strictures of evolution theory’s “Modern Synthesis,” which is the current amalgam of Darwinian thought with, essentially, the work of Mendel and Crick & Watson. The papers collected here stretch that model to accommodate new discoveries, such as from comparative genomics, and new ideas, such as niche construction (creatures create their environments, rather than adapting to what is given). Whether natural selection really drives evolutionary change, or should by relegated to the sidelines of evolutionary theory, the reader can decide. For my money, nat sel is benched, despite the contributors to this book resisting such an extreme interpretation.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 1, 2012 at 5:31 pm

      Very interesting. Thank you.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 9, 2012 at 7:50 pm

      Star, a huge thanks for these references. I’ve got the Evolution book – and already in the first 3 chapters they’ve torn apart the core ideas laid out by Darwin, Huxley, Dobzhanski, Haldane, etc – everyone that McKenna rested his theories on. For some reason I overlooked that you mentioned two books, so I’ll get the other as well. It’s very clear that they’ve come up with the idea and then look for the evidence to back it, rather than putting grammar first. They show all of the problems, and then pretend that this new interpretation is an extention of Darwinism and Huxley’s Modern Synthesis. It’s a pathetic display of people who refuse to see the forest through the trees – and clearly the entire damned thing is about eugenics. I love Fisher’s landscapes – and these peaks of “fit performance” and then he goes on to say that they believed in one peak, rather than many…. absolutely hilarious the cognitive dissonance revealed in this book by evolutionary scientists.

      Clearly what they’re setting forth is an entirely new foundation that refutes the racist / eugenics / humanist based BS of the past with actual science.

      • September 15, 2012 at 9:55 am

        There’s video of Fodor presenting his arguments against natural selection at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIYKCHPe5n8&feature=relmfu

        Unfortunately, at about 14:30 his microphone craps out. But hang in there. The AV experts get him back on line.

        It’s such a touchy subject, I’ll repeat that Fodor’s particular argument has nothing to do with the Bible, God or any religion. It’s essentially about how genetic coextensiveness among phenotypic traits precludes natural selection from being able to distinguish fitness-enhancing traits from run-of-the-mill traits.

        Anyway, “trait” is problematic in itself. Creatures possess no natural joints at which they can be cleaved into distinct traits.

  27. paul
    September 1, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    Have you talked to Lorenzo about this? And have you listened to the original episode #316 of psychedelic salon that was deleted on request of dennis including comments, where mckenna got more or less exposed as being an egomaniac hack for most of his carreer? This may have been something THEY could have used to steer/blackmail him with.

  28. Jan Irvin
    September 1, 2012 at 10:53 pm

    Here’s some of that McKenna quote from the above video with Terence Speaking the Unspeakable:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IO7pHD3X9M

    Terence McKenna from Speaking the Unspeakable: Maui, 1994. (“In Praise Of Psychedelics”)

    Questioner 1:
    Hi, I just wanted to know if you have heard about a book called The Mutant Message?

    Terence McKenna:
    No.

    Questioner 1:
    I want to tell you little bit about its because it’s very interesting. I think it follows what you’re been talking about. I love what your ideas about collective consciousness. And I think the book describes an aboriginal tribe in Australia that has been living the way in which you’re speaking, in a collective, and what they’ve come to the conclusion of is that they can no longer procreate. Because they have recognized that they can no longer exist on this planet. And the reason they call the but the mutant message is that believe we are a mutant life form on this planet that is destroying it to the extent that they can no longer continue their lineage. And it’s an interesting concept, because it’s the first culture that I know of that has selectively chosen not to breed and along with your concept of raising our consciousness so that we understand the destructive nature of ourselves, what about a parallel vision of reducing our population as these people are. Of consciously choosing not to procreate at this time?

    Terence McKenna:

    Well it’s interesting that you brought this up. Yes, I’ve been saying for some time that, ***the mushroom pointed this out to me***, if every woman had only one child the population of the planet would fall 50% in 40 years. 50% in 40 years – without war, revolution, coercion, anything else. Now when you suggest this to people they say, well didn’t they try that in China and it failed?. Yes. But you have to think about a couple of things. First of all a child born to a woman in Maui or Malibu or Manhattan, that child will use between 800 and 1000 times more resources in its lifetime than a child born to a woman in Bangladesh. Why do we preach birth control in Bangladesh? We should be preaching it on Maui, Manhattan and Malibu. Because the women in those places are highly educated, socially responsible, global people. And therefore are the population most likely to respond to this suggestion. If 15% of the women in the high-tech industrial democracies were to to limit their childbearing to one child, within 10 years certain pressure indicators on the planet would begin to move away from the red and into the black.

    So I think that we have got to think with this question of population. There are clearly too many people. And one woman, one child, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a psychedelic advocate, to understand the impact of that. If the population of the earth was cut in half everybody alive would be twice as wealthy. It’s possible in 120 years that we could reduce the world’s population to a billion very healthy, very comfortable, very well educated people.

    Ok, that’s part of what ***the mushroom said***. And that may seem radical and some circles, but not here perhaps. It also said something else which I rarely mention, ***but since you brought it up***, there are not only too many people, there are too many men [laughter]. And ***I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth***. It’s very rare in mammal populations that you have a 50-50 ratio of male to female and in fact it’s well-known that male infants are less robust than female infants. And the reason why we have a 50-50 sexual ratio is because we artificially support males, and withdraw all resources from females. I suspect in the high Paleolithic the ratio is closer to 2 to 1 [total unsupported BS – see citations]. And my supposition and thinking about this is that probably the best ratio is about this is 3 to 1. This is the way to feminize the human race if you’re serious. This is the way to advance women if you’re serious. Then what you have is less men, women whose dedication to the reproductive activities is confined in time to the amount of time it takes to raise only one child. This would be tremendously salutary to our problems. I’ve never heard it advocated even by the most radical, lesbian feminist, yada yada [yeah, right]. I’ve never heard anyone say male birth should be limited [yeah, right]. But it obviously should. And through amniocentesis* and this sort of thing we can steer ourselves toward a population with the predominance of females and those females should have only one child. And 75% of those children should also be female. And I don’t consider myself a gung ho feminist. I mean, ***I’m a feminist*** [feminism has been entirely disproved – by women – see Karen in the citations], but I don’t read the literature, or try to understand all of the factions and theories. ***AS A HUMANIST*** I advocate a reduction in male birth. It just seems obvious that that’s the way to go. If it doesn’t seem obvious to you then let’s have an a public debate about it, and at least make it part of the rhetoric of the culture that this is an option for people to think about.

    Best Terence McKenna quotes – ever:
    ***I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth***
    ****This is the way to feminize the human race****
    ***I’m a feminist***
    ***AS A HUMANIST*** ****I advocate a reduction in male birth****
    ~ Terence McKenna

    There’s more of this to transcribe, but I’ll get to it later unless someone else wants to finish it. It’s like at 1:17 something to where I finished.

    • Michael
      September 2, 2012 at 5:45 am

      Why are these the best Mckenna quotes ever? Oh I see your being sarcastic and using this thread of his to promote your agenda here. Why don’t you mix it up a bit and post some quotes of his that DID resonate with truth and goodness? There are many and it may allow you to stretch this whole crusade out a bit longer since you obviously derive so much pleasure from it. I’ve heard this talk and all other Terence talks that exist and I would definitely not call this one of his best and I’m a fan! yep I’m a fan. Didn’t agree with everything he said, didn’t buy into all the story telling that he could do so well but enjoyed listening to him ponder and throw out the most hair brained off the wall shit I have ever heard but you know what? I never took it too seriously, friends of mine didn’t take it so seriously and I don’t believer HE took it too seriously either, and if you listen to enough Mckenna you’d know that – and I know that you have. So if your trying to save the world from Terence Mckenna and trying to help all the ignorant folks who will believe ANYTHING the next charismatic counter cultural icon/guru will say – good luck on that my friend! All of this was rooted in the pot of psychedelic thinking – which is totally subjective. What conclusions one draws or ideas ones mind is lead toward when inspired by a psychedelic experience is ones own, and maybe not so clear in reality or to everyone else. Oh how I can relate to that! So whatever, keep up your post as main Inquisitor of the Farfromdemocratic Inquisition here on planet MKUltra. The Trivium is a good thing to read/understand – and the only ones who will get it are those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, and your playing Jesus trying to save the world from, not Terence the Wicked, but its ignorant self. Let me be clear, I like most of your research and discussions on gnostic media and follow it regularly – your work on Wasson and crew is close now to undeniable. But in the grand, and I believe holograohic matrix of the universe, everything is connected, and your psychedelic thinking is discovering that and now you got your work cut out for you brother – but for me this is becoming somewhat of an unbearable voyage in a stagnant never ending pond led by Captain Ahab. Ahoy! I think I have a life somewhere! Cheers and Hooooooooraaaaaay!

      • Jan Irvin
        September 2, 2012 at 11:03 am

        Michael, rather than reacting emotionally, why don’t you study the database download and the sources and citations listed so that you can see what he’s selling. How is it my agenda when I’m providing more than 6000 citations for you to verify? Please do study things before leaping to false conclusions.

        And when you realize that he’s selling the very agendas of Rothschild, Huxley, Darwin, Tielhard, etc, and he admits he’s selling feminism and humanism, and when you understand the ties to the Macy Conferences and MKULTRA – by studying the information first, you’ll realize that there’s a horrible agenda going on here.

        Had you bothered with any of the citations provided, you’d have seen that it’s not all rooted in a pot of psychedelic thinking – and the origins of these ideas he claims came from the mushrooms CLEARLY came from the Huxleys, Darwin, etc – who created the very ideas he’s selling. As already mentioned, you might want to read their books on eugenics and humanism. You might also want to study the Karen of Girl Writes What and Curtis Duncan interviews – as already mentioned in regard to these very, exact quotes. So try not to ignore all of the citions provivided and then dream up your unsupported accusations of my agenda. What is my agenda? If you studied things before leaping to conclusions – as has been repeated over and over here, you’d put things into context for yourself and see that i’m revealing THEIR agenda.

        Why do you need to make up ad hominems about being the “main Inquisitor of the Farfromdemocratic Inquisition here on planet MKUltra”? Why can’t you just focus on the facts presented and study them for yourself and stop trying to pick the maggots out of the shit?

        You can find all of McKenna’s other types of quotes EVERYWHERE online – many of them from the 70 hours of his talks that came from right here at Gnostic Media. But what you won’t find online is his eugenics, humanist, feminist, totalitarian quotes anyplace. THAT’S WHY THEY’RE HERE. TO BRING A BALANCE WHERE THERE IS NONE ANY PLACE ELSE. STOP BEING SO ONE SIDED AND BLIND.

        Everything here ties DIRECTLY into my Wasson investigation – which I’ve yet to reveal.

      • Ashley Wildman
        September 13, 2012 at 6:54 am

        Learn to use paragraphs Michael. Also your ad homonyms totally discredit your statement.

        Reading Jan’s posts, listening to his podcasts and reviewing his citations i find it hard to believe he has a malevolent agenda.

        After years of hearing Terence Mckenna being praised as some sort of psychedelic guru it’s actually refreshing to hear some critical evaluations of his work.

  29. robert42
    September 2, 2012 at 9:29 am

    Just a couple of clarifying thoughts about competing theories of evolution:

    I use the word “evolution” to denote the phenomenon of biological species changing over time.

    An analogy can be drawn with conspiracy theories about the events on 9/11/2001. That is, no one disputes that a conspiracy was a part of those events. The only disagreement is which conspiracy theory is the correct one: the one endorsed by the US government, or the unofficial alternative theories.

    Similarly, no-one who has honestly actually looked at the evidence (grammar) disputes that evolution has occurred. Species have changed over geological time, with new ones appearing and others becoming extinct. The enormous amount of evidence makes it clear that evol;ution has occurred. The only intelligent question is: which theory is the correct one?

    Various theories that have been proposed are:

    1. Natural selection, acting upon a pool of random mutations.

    2. Lamarckian evolution, whereby members of a species acquire adaptive traits within their lifetimes that can be passed to their progeny. The most famous example of this is the proposed mechanism by which giraffes acquired their long necks: The ancestors of modern giraffes stretched their necks up to reach leaves that were just out of reach, their necks got permanently a bit longer as a result of so much stretching, and their offspring inherited the longer necks, and so on with each generation until giraffes ended up with very long necks.

    3. Teleological theories of two types:

    a. There is a God, somewhere outside of the biosphere (at the end of time, ala Teilhard or Tipler, or outside of our familiar universe, ala various mainstream religious doctrines) drawing every living thing towards conformity with itself; that is, towards a perfect state.

    b. There is a God within everything that is drawing each living thing towards ultimate unification – the New Age model.

    c. God shows up in unexpected places and influences man to evolve in “the right direction” ala McKenna’s concept of The Mushroom.

    Can anyone think of any other theories that I can add to these?

    May I suggest that anyone who wants to challenge a theory ought to have an alternative to offer. In other words, “compared to what?” is a reasonable response to some foam-flecked critic of “Darwinism” (when they call it that, it’s a giveaway that you’re dealing with religious zealot). I suspect that the most rabid anti-evolutionists fail to offer their preferred theory because it cannot stand any examination, and they know it.

    One other thing: Charles Darwin and all of his inbred cousins to the nth degree could be evil incarnate, without it affecting in any way the correctness or otherwise of the theory of evolution by natural selection. I hope most people here are familiar enough with the informal fallacies to recognize an argument ad hominem when they see it.

  30. robert42
    September 2, 2012 at 2:26 pm

    I wrote:
    “One other thing: Charles Darwin and all of his inbred cousins to the nth degree could be evil incarnate, without it affecting in any way the correctness or otherwise of the theory of evolution by natural selection. I hope most people here are familiar enough with the informal fallacies to recognize an argument ad hominem when they see it.”

    My apologies for the multiple posting, but for completeness I should add that, in addition to argumentum ad hominem, the anti-evolution-by-natural-selection people also typically commit the following fallacies:

    Genetic Fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy)

    and

    Argumentum ad Nazium (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html)

    • September 3, 2012 at 2:15 pm

      A full-fledged evolution debate would be more suitable elsewhere, but at least look at the Fodor book referenced in my previous comment. Natural selection is not at all a straightforward proposition. It is HIGHLY problematic, conceptually.

      The theory’s flaws are what they are, whether or not a given critic peddles any alternative theory.

      But since you’re collecting alternatives, click my name at the top of this post and you’ll find another specimen for your collection.

      • Jan Irvin
        September 3, 2012 at 2:40 pm

        I bought your recommendation last night. Thanks.

      • robert42
        September 4, 2012 at 8:25 am

        Thanks Starlarvae (all of you).

        I get the feeling that this book is going become “haven’t done your grammar!” ammo.. ;-)

        I had a look at your website, which is very impressive. My compliments to the Brain Bug! ;-)

        You evolutionary theory is basically the strong anthropic principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle) with an element of let’s-all-be-friends-and-get-along.

        Speaking of star bugs and science-fictionlike scenarios, I thought you might enjoy this clip from a story by that old neocon, Robert Heinlein:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h4dVFOi3Xg

  31. Daryl Smith
    September 2, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Now that I read these comments I recall that the brothers Mckenna we’re inspired to travel by a woman explorer that was researching a vine that was possibly efficacious as an herbal abortive. There’s a book about her with Terence blurbing, I think, on the cover. I know someone reading this remembers the title.

  32. juan von trillion
    September 2, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    Jan,

    I want to chime in here in a thoughtful way, stating first that you do excellent work in research and interviews. I don´t know for whom it is excellent, but facts are facts. So they say. My problem is, you are taking a fraction of Terence into account, not the whole man. You look at his data and his environment, but perhaps your heart is not listening too much.

    In the context of the 150 or so recorded talks of TMK, most of which I have listened to, some of them several times (over many years), there is a real zoo of topics that are discussed, or monologued about, not only psychedelic ideas, woowoo-land and Timewave Zero. The list of topics that he does talk about is as interesting as the topics he does not talk about, or which he skims over. Terence never talked about power structures, their influence over our lives, but he did also not watch TV and read plenty of books and was online as soon as he could be.

    Perhaps you, Jan, could be more specific about the real case of TMK you are trying to make. Because guilt by association, be it to Darwin, Huxley, Esalen, Leary, Eugenicists or whoever, in my view is not enough of a case if you are honest. Where were you in the year 2000, knowledge-wise, and what major advancements have you had since then? Can we grant this to TMK as well, that he was certainly well-intentioned, genuinely interested and curious, uninformed about several topics (aren´t we all), and uninterested in i.e. earthly power structures (“Nobody is in Control, not the Jews, not the Jesuits, nobody”). In my opinion he actually named those who run people like Rothschilds and the maze of private interests groups which handle people like Huxley and Wasson.

    Seriously, Jan, you can not condemn the man for his association with Esalen, or having taken some of his dearest ideas of people who are now proven to be handled by someone. In short, he did not come across as someone selling stories for others. Where was the money for him, was there any? Where was the impact (in his lifetime) on an important scale if he would have been a puppet (with amazing acting abilities)?

    It would be helpful if you could put your findings into some perpective that is not so goddamn tight-assed and constantly referring to the brain window on some link. If you put out all these recordings, you probably listened to them, just like I did and many others. So what if he said he was a feminist? Who knew 10, 15, 20 years ago that is was an invention of the Rockefellers (their handlers, of course), as one Rockefeller admitted to Aaron Russo, to get the children away from home and to tax the other half of the population?

    Again: who knew this back then? Terence? If you think so, prove it, Jan. Your approach is great, because you come to new information that is hard to get and few people care about, just because you love the truth. I am the same in that respect, and so must be most people who frequent places like this one. But your are heartless and limited and staring at your data only. Your heart knows several seconds before your brain reacts. We are not all brains, and it is more than a metaphor to listen to your heart.

    I have seen real man-dominated society from within, real machismo. It sucks when all the important stuff is handled by men. It also sucks when you get a fake feminine-ness baked up by the same guys who simply infiltrate anything of interest to run it from within.

    You are a good researcher, but look up the ladder where it leads, it does not end with Wasson or the CIA. Be really courageous and state what you find, though others have done it but few if any mention the people who run things. Thousands of books have been written about them. Terence just wasn´t interested in that area, he was too artsy, spaced-out, free-form, stand-up philosopher, which is what I personally like about him.

    You have yet to prove that:

    1- TMK knew about the deadly agenda that people “around him” have been devising and following

    2- That he benefitted financially in some way other than spending time to get to and from lectures.

    3- That his project with Kat Harrison, the shamanic plant reservation on the Big Island, was in any way sanctioned or supported by the truly dark people behind Esalen or any other important think tank (sceptic tanks).

    I think this plant sanctuary shows the spirit of the man, a trained ethonobotanist and art historian without a credit card, who most likely had lesser-talented thinkers around him but was too polite to point it out to them. He never once said much more than “Thank You” to Leary, after Leary introduced him somewhere, sometime. Never ever in his talks did he pay dues to anyone of the people you mention, not Wasson, not Huxley, not Teilhard de Chardin, nobody. He took their ideas, explained them to people, shone different lights on them, compared them, and put them back where he got them from – almost in the same condition as before picking them up.

    Jan, he wasn´t so uptight about anything much, that was his trick to be so endearing. He explored lines of thought and made up science fiction worlds. So what if there´s too many males according to him? He probably wanted to get rid of the old white fuckers who run pretty much all corporations and institutions from mahogany desks that came from his beloved Amazon – but would not say such a gross thing. He probably thought it. He was a loose gun in ANY context because he was a free, independent, brilliant thinker. Which, by the way, you are not, Jan. You are a great researcher, which is not bad, either.

    I am not saying what you have to learn, Jan, but something is there that you need to look at if you want to get to your full potential and not come across as an asshole. You don´t want to be unfair to a dead man whom many people cherish for his free, creative thinking, often a good decade or two ahead. You will find a small crowd here at GMedia who don´t like TMK´s voice or simply love to destroy what others admire in some way, but you betray the spirit of this man if you just try to throw him into the black pot of handlers who are pretty much anywhere where it is relevant to be, simply for the reason to handle it. Psychopaths are that way, and perhaps TMK was too distracted by his restless intellect to notice the dark hoods around him. I mean, who knows everything about everything, and right now?

    Juan von Trillion

    • Jan Irvin
      September 2, 2012 at 8:33 pm

      I love coincidence theorists. :-)

      • Joseph Pierce
        September 3, 2012 at 9:15 pm

        Well, coincidence happens to coincide with bonafide experiences.

        I love “logical criterion theorists” as well. :D

        Well said, Juan von Trillion.

        Try getting a logical, criteria which you can apply in the third dimension, Jan.

        Do you really think you can make much of a solid criterion of truth for what happened on salvia divinorum – when somehow you became part of the wall in your house?

        Juan makes a good point: that hard-lined, dogmatic criterion thinkers become nihilistic assholes if they cannot be aware of their own experience in the heart.

        • Jan Irvin
          September 11, 2012 at 12:09 am

          Hey Joseph, seriously, the citations speak for themselves. I didn’t provide only one coincidence, but more than 40. yeah, a few can be bonafide experiences, but this many, and this tight a group, give me a break with your name calling. But seriously, if you’re going to continue on with this sort of shit, then just buzz off and don’t come back. I’m tired of wasting time with you – setting up your straw man here with bonafide experience…

          Obviously a logical path can be followed. Actually, the criteria, if you study it, applies just fine to reality. Maybe put your grammar first? Oh yeah, we had that conversation and then you went on about how you can’t verify reality, or a citation.

          In episodes 49 – 51 we covered this entire issue, as do the notes on the trivium website – it’s called small face and large face. Good luck with that.

          But seriously, Joseph, I’m tired of this. So please just don’t post, or I’ll just report any further posts as spam and you’ll get banned WordPress wide. Thanks.

  33. Jan Irvin
    September 3, 2012 at 8:07 am

    World Evolutionary Humanism, Eugenics and UNESCO Pt 1 – Julian Huxley
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nmILo81wvE

  34. Ben Steigmann
    September 3, 2012 at 3:10 pm

    ==Note: If the links interfere with the layout of your webpage, please modify them.==

    As I noted on your Facebook page – In the introduction to the Trilateral Commission text “Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing of the World’s Economy and the Earth’s Ecology”, Maurice Strong wrote “The authors demonstrate that the world has now moved beyond economic interdependence to ecological interdependence – and to an intermeshing of the two. They argue persuasively that this interlocking of the world’s economy and the earth’s ecology is the new reality of the century, with profound implications for the shape of our institutions of governance, national and international. …[Jim Macniell] is now advising me on the road to Rio”: http://books.google.com/books?id=NP4-YDoXRAkC&pg=PR9&lpg=PR9&dq=The+authors+demonstrate+that+the+world+has+now+moved+beyond+economic+interdependence+to+ecological+interdependence&source=bl&ots=ukcRYdN7sh&sig=UU-uLc497lSH36j4Af8YTD40tdI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3jtAUMHXIqW7iwKQ2YGoDg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20authors%20demonstrate%20that%20the%20world%20has%20now%20moved%20beyond%20economic%20interdependence%20to%20ecological%20interdependence&f=false

    And later in the introduction, he wrote, “Rio will be the largest summit conference ever held, and it will have the political capacity to produce the basic changes needed in our national and international economic agendas and in our institutions of governance to ensure a secure and sustainable future for the world community. By the year 2012, these changes must be fully integrated into our economic and political life so that the world will not be forced to confront the deepening crises that will inevitably result if we fail to make the transition to sustainability.” : http://books.google.com/books?id=NP4-YDoXRAkC&pg=PR10&lpg=PR10&dq=%22Rio+will+be+the+largest+summit+conference+ever+held%2C+and+it+will+have+the+political+capacity%22&source=bl&ots=ukcRYdI5zm&sig=3WzxnUaJn0k8mAs2_f0tQ5osmz0&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22Rio%20will%20be%20the%20largest%20summit%20conference%20ever%20held%2C%20and%20it%20will%20have%20the%20political%20capacity%22&f=false

    So Maurice Strong admitted that the year 2012 is the projected year of the inauguration of this “New World Order” that he and his confederates talk so much about. To understand how serious this is, consider the following document, also written by Strong, that delineates the real purpose behind the Rio conference, which he discusses in the writing linked to in my previous post: http://ia600403.us.archive.org/18/items/GeorgeHuntUncedEarthSummit1992cobdenClubsPapersaldousHuxleythe_125/1-1-the-cobdenClubsPapers.pdf

    Also, as far as Castaneda is concerned – you’re right, you can’t unsee it. His material derives somewhat from Shamanic entheogenic practices and Gurdjieff’s work. But most of it (and this relates to your work) bears striking similarities to Gnosticism. Here is an essay making the comparisons – it’s essentially as if Castaneda made a new rendition of Gnosticism: http://web.archive.org/web/20090211060600/http://www.metahistory.org/CCandGnosis.php

  35. lazer
    September 3, 2012 at 7:50 pm

    Thank you Jan for all the time and study it took to follow this subject to where it has led so far. Telling the truth can be a revolutionary act, and can make or (sadly) break friendships.

    To quote a well known songwriter…

    All I want is the truth
    Just give me some truth

    Ive had enough of watching
    Scenes
    Of schizophrenic – ego – centric
    – paranoic – prima – donnas

    All I want is the truth
    Just give me some truth.

    I’m willing to follow wherever this may lead, no matter how uncomfortable the truth is. All I want is the truth. I’m weary of deception, no matter its origin.

  36. Benjamin Steigmann
    September 3, 2012 at 8:07 pm

    Jan, I posted the following for your readers, but it seems to have been lost as you updated your page. It relates to the tie in between what you just put forth and the larger context of what we are dealing with here. You know this, but your readers might benefit:

    In the introduction to the Trilateral Commission text “Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing of the World’s Economy and the Earth’s Ecology”, Maurice Strong wrote “The authors demonstrate that the world has now moved beyond economic interdepe
    ndence to ecological interdependence – and to an intermeshing of the two. They argue persuasively that this interlocking of the world’s economy and the earth’s ecology is the new reality of the century, with profound implications for the shape of our institutions of governance, national and international. …[Jim Macniell] is now advising me on the road to Rio”: http://books.google.com/books?id=NP4-YDoXRAkC&pg=PR9&lpg=PR9&dq=The+authors+demonstrate+that+the+world+has+now+moved+beyond+economic+interdependence+to+ecological+interdependence&source=bl&ots=ukcRYdN7sh&sig=UU-uLc497lSH36j4Af8YTD40tdI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3jtAUMHXIqW7iwKQ2YGoDg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20authors%20demonstrate%20that%20the%20world%20has%20now%20moved%20beyond%20economic%20interdependence%20to%20ecological%20interdependence&f=false

    And later in the introduction, he wrote, “Rio will be the largest summit conference ever held, and it will have the political capacity to produce the basic changes needed in our national and international economic agendas and in our institutions of governance to ensure a secure and sustainable future for the world community. By the year 2012, these changes must be fully integrated into our economic and political life so that the world will not be forced to confront the deepening crises that will inevitably result if we fail to make the transition to sustainability.” : http://books.google.com/books?id=NP4-YDoXRAkC&pg=PR10&lpg=PR10&dq=%22Rio+will+be+the+largest+summit+conference+ever+held%2C+and+it+will+have+the+political+capacity%22&source=bl&ots=ukcRYdI5zm&sig=3WzxnUaJn0k8mAs2_f0tQ5osmz0&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22Rio%20will%20be%20the%20largest%20summit%20conference%20ever%20held%2C%20and%20it%20will%20have%20the%20political%20capacity%22&f=false

    So Maurice Strong admitted that the year 2012 is the projected year of the inauguration of this “New World Order” that he and his confederates talk so much about. To understand how serious this is, consider the following document, also writ
    ten by Strong, that delineates the real purpose behind the Rio conference, which he discusses in the writing linked to in my previous post: http://ia600403.us.archive.org/18/items/GeorgeHuntUncedEarthSummit1992cobdenClubsPapersaldousHuxleythe_125/1-1-the-cobdenClubsPapers.pdf

  37. Joseph Pierce
    September 3, 2012 at 8:28 pm

    It’s interesting to know how the psychedelic movement may have been co-opted by the “elitist” or the egoic “they” – as we like to call “them,” the “other” “evil” humans.

    I suppose it may help people wake up and see the first and second levels of the manipulation, as it were; but all of this is merely more of the political bullshit of court magi.

    We might as well do an interview about how the “hippie” organic farming and food business was also “co-opted” by the “elite”- “they” who control the political food industry.

    But yet we all still go to the grocery store and presumably buy our organic foods and beverages. http://www.peacecouncil.net/pnl/03/718/718CorporateTakeover.htm

    Hmm…I suppose we’re all in error for supporting all of these supposedly “organic” companies via buying their products. They’re all in on the conspiracy, too.

  38. Martyn George
    September 3, 2012 at 8:58 pm

    transcribed from – Psychedelic Salon 116: Terence McKenna, Mark Pesce
    Techno Pagans at the End of History
    Esalen Institute, 1998

    TM- “it great what your say about…that we’re trying to push the definitions of Esalen’s relevance, because you know the entire intellectual and spiritual effort here over the past 30 years flys under the flag of the human potential movement…..what we are talking about here and trying to bring gently onto the stage is an enormous frontier of human potential. We are to some degree beginning to design ourselves or beginning to design our potential in the service of the idea of the perfected humanity of some sort. And what we are talking about here is not genetic manipulation or eugenics or any of these somewhat dubious enterprises with a clouded history, but using technological prosthesis to extend and enrich humanness to enrich communication….and it is believe me the want of good communication that is the thing that if…anything undoes us this will be it..that our language has failed that we misread each others intent…that we could not understand each other……” 31:05-32:35

    • Joseph Pierce
      September 3, 2012 at 10:42 pm

      TMK:[And what we are talking about here is not genetic manipulation or eugenics or any of these somewhat dubious enterprises with a clouded history, but using technological prosthesis to extend and enrich humanness to enrich communication…]

      Irvin: [But what you won’t find online is his eugenics, humanist, feminist, totalitarian quotes anyplace. THAT’S WHY THEY’RE HERE. TO BRING A BALANCE WHERE THERE IS NONE ANY PLACE ELSE. STOP BEING SO ONE SIDED AND BLIND.]

      Who’s being more ambivalent here?

      McKenna could indeed be confused about the information he has questionably gleaned from “possible” agents. But how could he be a “willful idiot?” Nice ad hominem.

      Irvin could indeed be confused about the information he has questionably gleaned from “possible” agents. But how far down the rabbit hole of Spock-like logical criteria do we have to go?! :O

      • Jan Irvin
        September 11, 2012 at 12:35 am

        Joseph, look around you. It’s as if you buried your head in the sand. Everyone McKenna is hanging out with CREATED the evolutionary ideas that he promotes via 2012, Habit and Novelty, etc.

        “What Teilhard was saying here can easily be summed up in a few words,” says John Perry Barlow. “The point of all evolution up to this stage is the creation of a collective organism of Mind.”

        ‘the Archaic revival’ – Terence Mckenna page 220,
        “What does it mean to accept the solutions of vegetable forms of life as metaphors for the conduct of the affairs of the human world? Two important changes would follow from adopting this assumption:

        – The feminizing of culture. Culture would be feminized on a level that has yet to be fully explored.”

        I suppose if you’re still ignoring the Karen of Girl Writes What, and the Curtis Duncan interviews, and the database cited repeatedly, you could ignore all of McKenna’s own connections to the very people who created these eugenics programs McKenna here pretends not to sell.

        And by the way, that quote is about transhumanism – also an idea coined by Julian Huxley on the same path.. .but I would suggest you go out and do some research on exactly this is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=bRUxjWKTPVs&NR=1

        Transhumanism and humanism are in fact eugenics. Maybe you’re confused as you’re still incapable of studying the database and the links and citations and books so that you don’t end up looking foolish by thinking transhumanism is benign.

        Don’t bother replying – as I’m quite done with you and I’ll ban you if you post on my site again.

  39. Leif
    September 3, 2012 at 9:50 pm

    I see the web you are piecing together here, Jan. There are several points in the article where you say ‘well I can’t prove this, but…’ (“Right now we can’t prove that McKenna was an agent, but he was most certainly, at least, a willful idiot. “). This is not a call for citations or a logical-fallacy battle, I’m just trying to get where you’re coming from (I’ve listened to your shows, and donated, please don’t refer me to them): my assumption from reading this article is that you have equated evolution with natural selection/fitness, two entirely different theories. Could you bluntly write a list of what you think is going on here with the research?
    Am I right in reading this article as, roughly: powerful people created the idea of evolution (what you’re referring to as “natural selection”, look at Manuel Delanda’s work on coevolution in predator/prey species for more of this distinction between the two) who then met Terence Mckenna who propagated a teleological/natural-selective psychedelic philosophy?

    I agree with you that Mckenna had this weird strain of teleology and doomsday in his work but it might have been equally due to his catholic upbringing and the formative mytho-narrative that that would crystalize upon an individuals psyche. Mckenna is fanciful, no doubt about it, but giving him absolutely no agency in this article (except for the agency of complicity) seems heavy-handed.

    More interesting than this debate to me is your use of Aristotelian logic and hyper-awareness of fallacies (which I thank you for illuminating me on) in relation to assessing reality (I mean reality in the sense of “how you see the world”, thats it). I grew up reading Robert Anton Wilson and his philosophy of maybe-logic. How do you view RAW’s work (specifically Prometheus Rising and Quantum Psychology)? I enjoyed Mckenna in my teens but RAW stays as a deep cultural lens through which I see the world and I find his method of conspiracy research much more compelling than just piecing together snippets and calling it a revelation because, there is psychology all sides of every story as well as ambiguous threads of agency/complicity. In short I feel you should read more Robert Anton WIlson and if you have and don’t care for him I would be interested in why.

    Thanks

    • Joseph Pierce
      September 4, 2012 at 9:46 am

      [More interesting than this debate to me is your use of Aristotelian logic and hyper-awareness of fallacies (which I thank you for illuminating me on) in relation to assessing reality (I mean reality in the sense of “how you see the world”, thats it). I grew up reading Robert Anton Wilson and his philosophy of maybe-logic.]

      I know this question was not directed at me, but you make some very good points here, Leif.

      Robert Anton Wilson: Wilson described his work as an “attempt to break down conditioned associations, to look at the world in a new way, with many models recognized as models or maps, and no one model elevated to the truth”. His goal being “to try to get people into a state of generalized agnosticism, not agnosticism about God alone but agnosticism about everything” (cf. solipsism, acatalepsia, Pyrrhonism). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Anton_Wilson

      And if you go into what Pyrronhism is, you will find that is what I have been offering here as an alternative to the Peripetetics (Aristotelian school of thought). See my posts on the comments section of Red Ice Radio: Jan Irvin – Hour 1 & 2 – Gordon Wasson & The Secret History of Magic Mushrooms. Therein, I offer, for an example, Wilson’s philosophy, but instead in the light of more ancient writers and thinkers, such as Sextus Empiricus, who, along with Diogenes Laertius, has preserved much of Pyrrho’s philosophy.

      You can find one of Sextus’s works for free, Against the Logicians, here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/62122635/Bett-Ed-Sextus-Empiric-Us-Against-the-Logicians

      Here is some solid information about Pyrrho. Also noteworthy is how his philosophy has very strong similarities, almost identical, to the Buddhist philosophy. This means he did have strong influences from the ancient Indian yogis. http://www.josephwaligore.com/greek-philosophy/indian-influence-on-hellenistic-philosophy/

      Here are some good books which deal with the “original skepticism.”

      “Sextus Empiricus: The Transmission and Recovery of Pyrrhonism.” http://books.google.com/books/about/Sextus_Empiricus.html?id=0eS8LC7fqgMC

      “Outlines of Pyrrhonism:” http://books.google.com/books?id=usyFPQAACAAJ&source=gbs_similarbooks

      Here is the ancient argument AGAINST the so-called “grammarians” of trivium yore:

      http://www.amazon.com/Sextus-Empiricus-Grammarians-Mathematicos-Philosophers/dp/0198244703

      Here is the writing, Against the Physicists and Against the Ethicists: http://www.powells.com/biblio?isbn=9780674993440

      As you can probably tell, I have a problem with people who present the Aristotelian school of thought as if it was the only original, default way of logic and critical thinking.

      But it isn’t.

      There was a logic before there was Logic, and that stretches back into antiquity further than the Western schools of the Greek philosophers. The way of life offered by the Indian yogis, the Vedic philosophies; the Hindu, Taoist and Buddhist et al.

      • robert42
        September 5, 2012 at 7:58 am

        You’re engaged in a snow job.

        Metaphysics is a distinct area of philosophy from logic.

        The expression “a logic before there was Logic” makes no sense, since logic, if it is true, is necessarily consistent with itself. So more modern “logics” must accomodate classical logic (and reduce to it) in the same way that Special Relativity reduces Newtonian physics at ordinary speeds.

        Considering Indian logic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyaya_Sutras is Aristotelean Logic with different terms and some different metaphysics.

        Perhaps you could state your case succinctly, instead of merely tossing a pile of books on the table?

        • Joseph Pierce
          September 5, 2012 at 9:43 am

          [You’re engaged in a snow job.]

          Well, sure. When you’ve made up your mind and are CERTAIN about such and such, aka, the trivium and logical fallacies, well, then who am I to persuade you? You’ll just label me as being engaged in a…excuse the modern slang…”snow job.” :)

          Been there, done that. The Christians also have their Bible, and what do they do? Accuse atheists of “snow jobs.” Nothing new under the sun.

          [Metaphysics is a distinct area of philosophy from logic.]

          Well then, you shouldn’t be applying logical fallacies to the metaphysics of mushroom experiences, ie, that of McKenna.

          Maybe you should actually read the books and articles presented on the subject matter at hand which I have discussed. That’s what Irvin would tell you. Metaphysics has everything to do with the epistemology, etymology, methodology, et al of logic, especially so in the ancient world. If you really study what the underlining essence of the arguments were about, you’ll see it’s metaphysics. Modern “logic” has been reduced down to analytical, empirical jargon, thanks in large part to the incompleteness of the Peripatetic philosophy of appearances.

          [The expression “a logic before there was Logic” makes no sense, since logic, if it is true, is necessarily consistent with itself.]

          Incorrect. It cannot be “consistent with itself” if there hasn’t ever been a a consensus on what constitutes metalogical, cognizant consciousness. It isn’t consistent with itself because it has always been the case that conscious experiences have ever been an appearance of plasticity.

          See “Perplexities of Consciousness” by Eric Schwitzgebel: http://www.amazon.com/Perplexities-Consciousness-Life-Mind-Philosophical/dp/0262014904

          [Considering Indian logic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyaya_Sutras is Aristotelean Logic with different terms and some different metaphysics.]

          Well, sure. If you had read the example article I referred to you, it will be clear how it’s not surprising at all how we would have Aristotelian “Nyaya Sutras Logic” – considering how much of Greek philosophy originated in India and beyond.

          [Perhaps you could state your case succinctly, instead of merely tossing a pile of books on the table?]

          Read Sextus Empirucus’s work in full first: http://www.scribd.com/doc/62122635/Bett-Ed-Sextus-Empiric-Us-Against-the-Logicians

          I’ve already stated my case succinctly, more than once. Try also referring to my discussions on the thread, “Red Ice Radio: Jan Irvin – Hour 1 & 2 – Gordon Wasson & The Secret History of Magic Mushrooms.” Scroll down near the bottom of the page, and that’s where much of the conversation takes place.

          I can always state the case in summary, but to really apprehend what I’m contending here, you have to do the research and reading required – the books that I listed are a good start. If you want to play by your own rules of the trivium, then now’s your opportunity.

          • robert42
            September 6, 2012 at 6:23 am

            The business of referring to a bunch of books while not stating your case is the obfuscation that I intend by the term “snow job.”

            The lengthiness of your failures to state yourself clearly is argumentum ad nauseam.

            “[Metaphysics is a distinct area of philosophy from logic.]
            Well then, you shouldn’t be applying logical fallacies to the metaphysics of mushroom experiences, ie, that of McKenna.”

            That is argumentum tu quoque (“you too!”)

            “[The expression “a logic before there was Logic” makes no sense, since logic, if it is true, is necessarily consistent with itself.]

            Incorrect. It cannot be “consistent with itself” if there hasn’t ever been a a consensus on what constitutes metalogical, cognizant consciousness. It isn’t consistent with itself because it has always been the case that conscious experiences have ever been an appearance of plasticity.”

            Your sentences above are gibberish.

            “Truth is consistent with itself” is axiomatic, and really not hard to grasp. So if logic is true then there is one logic.

            “I’ve already stated my case succinctly, more than once.”

            You case is “read these books.” That is not what I meant by a succinct statement of your case. But if I missed such a summary of your case then please do restate it.

          • Joseph Pierce
            September 6, 2012 at 8:52 am

            [The business of referring to a bunch of books while not stating your case is the obfuscation that I intend by the term “snow job.”]

            I realize that. But YOU are not accepting the case before you. IF you had actually read what I referred to in the Red Ice Radio interview on Magic Mushrooms, then you’re apparent “confusion” on what I’m talking about may be helped.

            My point always was that the way in which Irvin believes in and utilizes the trivium for historical research – and then adamantly proposes other people must filter through this fiat of true human reasoning – is insufficient for firsthand observational experiences, which is subject to the Ground of metaphysical reality. Irvin goes too far, in my opinion, per research in Wasson’s psychedelic co-optation, or even Huxley’s and McKenna’s apparent connection with the apparently pro-eugenics Esalen Institute.

            The suspension of judgment on ANY given criterion of truth can only be as such, because criteria only “exist” as standards, measurements or balances in the dimension of APPEARANCES. THIS is what Sextus speaks of in his writing, which I linked to you for careful reading: “Against the Logicians.”

            Therefore, I further linked you a book which was written just recently by a philosopher who is regarded in academic circles as writing some of the best quality stuff out there on consciousness and experience. But just be careful not to UNQUESTIONABLY appeal to his authority. ;) Metaphysical cognizance has always been in question – since ancient times – and most likely, always will be. That’s the mystery. You cannot solve it via criteria. Criteria is always changing in appearances, so therefore CONSCIOUSNESS must always be unknown, unmeasurable and questionable. http://www.amazon.com/Perplexities-Consciousness-Life-Mind-Philosophical/dp/0262014904

            [The lengthiness of your failures to state yourself clearly is argumentum ad nauseam.]

            But that’s only your perception. See, you’re dealing with your temporary truth. Another week or so and you could be agreeing with my assessment here. How do you know? Well, you don’t. Neither do I. ;) As long as you flip out logical fallacies which are always subject to the realm of appearances, you can judge all you want. But the key is to suspend judgment. Jesus says, “Do not judge lest you be judged.” But since one can’t ever really suspend judgment even when one speaks, because language itself requires judgment, and is itself a criterion, then it is all futile. This is why the Indian yogis, for example, state that Silence only Is. The Via Negativa principle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_theology

            At least I can be AWARE that when I speak I am always passing judgment. Language simply is a man-made construct of illusory appearances.

            [That is argumentum tu quoque (“you too!”)]

            I disagree about that logical fallacy. If you would have paid attention, in MY perception your failure to recognize metaphysics having everything to do with cognizance and meta-logic does not qualify to label it a “logical fallacy.” Now you may disagree which is fine, but farting out logical fallacies to someone, which you deem genuine in your perception is quite fallacious in itself, if we remember how “illusory” criteria perception is. However, I do not readily reject criteria. They are all temporary structures that are necessary in a changing universe. That is how the Tao, the Ground of Being “predetermines” our Fate. Not in the free-willist way of thinking about this, but something like this: http://www.egodeath.com/#_Block-Universe_Determinism

            Incorrect. It cannot be “consistent with itself” if there hasn’t ever been a a consensus on what constitutes metalogical, cognizant consciousness. It isn’t consistent with itself because it has always been the case that conscious experiences have ever been an appearance of plasticity.”

            [Your sentences above are gibberish.]

            Read this article and it may become more clear to you: http://rsbakker.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/error-consciousness-part-one-the-smell-of-experience/

            Enjoy :)

  40. Blow_In
    September 4, 2012 at 4:06 am

    Just for the fun of it, check out this link to pictures of Charles Darwin.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portraits_of_Charles_Darwin

    He looks a bit like some of those Neanderthal reconstructions to me. His bust in the Natural History Museum in London shows this resemblance more clearly.

    Considering Darwin’s opinion of the Irish, one has to to wonder at the irony of the Natural History Museum being located on Cromwell Road.

    Speaking of the Irish, Irish slang gave me the perfect word to describe Timothy Leary, who I saw speak at the East Village theater in 1967. That word is Chancer.

    Leary is of Irish descent and so is McKenna. Make of that what you will. I never paid anything but glancing attention to either one of them or to any of the other psychedelic insiders that I have happened to meet in my meandering path through life.

    Psychedelics are not a cure for narcissism.

    P.S. The PayPal site was down this morning on this side of the Atlantic. I’ll try again later. PayPal seems to be suffering from mismanagement these days. It would be nice to find another way to pay.

  41. xen
    September 4, 2012 at 7:39 am

    So in summary: A bunch of people who all shared similar interests were friends.

    What a shocking revelation.

  42. Daryl Smith
    September 4, 2012 at 8:22 am

    The Witch-Doctor’s Apprentice by Nicole Maxwell. That’s the woman who was looking for the herbal abortive in the Amazon that initially moved Terence and Dennis to go on their trek. Anybody know anything about Terence’s Mother and Father (background, beliefs, tendencies ?). Any masonry there, I wonder ? (military or gov’t affiliations maybe ?) They’re oddly never mentioned in any of his generous screeds.

    • asol
      September 13, 2012 at 1:50 pm

      Nicole Maxwell I believe, he did a talk with her.

      • asol
        September 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm

        “The daughter of a privileged San Francisco family, ….. She found, for instance, that a sedge called the piripiri was used by several tribes as a highly effective oral contraceptive. Given to a girl at puberty, the drug apparently prevented conception for six to seven years.”
        http://www.rainforesttreasure.com/Nicole.htm

  43. Pacal
    September 4, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    Dear Jan Irvin,Was Jack Herer the Emperor of Hemp $100,000 Hemp challenge apart of the Wasson/Allegro special opts because of his own research into Mushrooms and the Bible with fellow Mushrooms and Mankind researcher James Arthur.I believe you should of “debunked” the HEMP-myth when you started in this field. Wonderful Work Jan Irvin Thank You

    • Jan Irvin
      September 11, 2012 at 1:27 am

      Allegro was never a part of any special ops. I don’t know what you’re talking about. Why are you attempting to misconstrue Allegro as part of this?

      Have you read my books? Have you read my second book where Jack Herer wrote the addendum? James Arthur was a liar and a pedophile and killed himself in jail rather than face trial. End of story.

      Why would I debunk “the hemp-myth”, when there’s no myth? Jack was a very close friend of mine for 18 years. I threw dirt on his grave. I’ve been over about every inch of his research.

  44. Patrick
    September 5, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    Yes well I am curious about how Dennis Mckenna works to this day at the Heffter institute which has received funding from the Rockefellers. I think Dennis is probably an unknowing pawn, but clearly they are still at it.

    While forced depopulation is of course monstrous, I wonder Jan, what do you think is an effective means of solving the very real environmental crisis we are facing? Lack of clean water, dependency on oil, deforrestation, the fact that the oceans are all but dead and filled with garbage are very real problems. Even if global warming is a hoax isnt it a crime against humanity and nature that there is smog in the air which requires air pollution warnings, not to mention acid rain and all the rest of it?

    If encouraging consumers to not have so many kids (when parents are too busy working to take proper care of them anyway) is offensive to you then what is an appropriate course of action? Sit back and let scientists make us in to cyborgs who use nano techs and GMOs to take over anything wild?

    You seem to hate new agers and there is certainly messed up people out there, but do you think other life forms have an inherrent right to live? Or do humans have the right to have dominion over the Earth and do whatever the hell they want?

    • Ben Steigmann
      September 5, 2012 at 5:42 pm

      Bernhard Guenther, who is into esoteric work, made a video that might give some insight on the problems with the New Age, and which doesn’t fall into the trap of having a hardcore materialist perspective: http://veilofreality.com/2011/01/19/know-thyself-%E2%98%9E-video/

    • Marcos
      September 6, 2012 at 6:58 pm

      It is true that human civilization as we know it is wrecking the planet. Only think about how many nuclear plants are around, and how incompetent the people running the Fukushima plants were to avoid a meltdown. We could go on forever, depleted uranium, agent orange, chemtrails, the list goes on and on.

      However, is this the inevitable consequence of families breeding too many children?

      I think once you have researched into the mechanics of world management ran by the elites, the comprehensive and holistic types of control imposed upon people ranging from the psychological to the material aspects of their lives, you’ll realize that the planet is being torn down not because there’s too many of us, but rather because of the insane people who control the oil based paradigm in which we are all stuck.

      The battle for your mind is the most important one. The fact that you think that the problem with the environment is that there are too many of us, is the starting point of their successful agenda. The planet could host unimaginable more billions of people if they were all living peacefully, without fear, and without trying to control nature and make it their bitch. Especially, if all of us would stop buying the bullshit that we are fed the moment we come into this world.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 11, 2012 at 1:32 am

      I have a really simple solution – and it gets right to the heart of the problem, rather than killing us off, we just need to reverse eugenics on the elites. I mean, take the queen of England for instance.. . That huge mansion she lives in and all of those people and resources she needs would power an entire city. Many other elites are the same way. Furthermore, it’s perpetually their “solutions” and whatnot that have brought us down this path. So, since it’s the elites who brought us planned obsolescence, Madison Ave., consumerism, striped our rights away, banned hemp, etc, it seems pretty clear to me that the best possible solution for the rest of the world to live in peace is simply to kill off the elites and their supporting structures and stop believing in government.

      Furthermore, the elites are absolutely unproductive leaches on society. Making usury based money out of thin air, and then stealing 1/3rd of what me make on top, etc, etc. If you have a parasite, you’ve got to kill it.

      • Ashley Wildman
        September 13, 2012 at 8:01 am

        Great solution i couldn’t agree with you more Jan.

      • David Amaral
        September 17, 2012 at 6:31 am

        Great article. I really agree with the position. Any ideas for a project to: “kill off the elites and their supporting structures and stop believing in government.” that is not so simple, i suppose. Any proposals?

    • sub rosa
      October 8, 2012 at 8:53 am

      By making the general statement that Heffter Institute was funded by the Rockefellers, you are implying that it was the whole Rockefeller family and of an imperialist nature. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. Heffter Institute was indeed partially funded by Laurance Rockefeller who wasn’t even close to imperial, but rather a wildlife conservationist. A lot of his career was spent expanding national parks, he was also a key early funder of Apple so if you’re reading this on a MacBook he deserves some praise.

      Not all Rockefellers carried ill intent, and it’s annoying to always see general statements like funded by the Rockefellers instead of saying specifically which one. The assumption amongst this community is that if it has the name Rockefeller on it, than it’s evil. Laurance Rockefeller even went so far in his last years of life to donate his ranch and home to enlarge two national parks.

      This guy was born into a family name that’s done many evils, but he wasn’t evil himself, just a curious and benevolent guy when it came to nature, eastern religion, technology, and even UFOs.

      Not nearly the broad stroke brush of Rockefeller cronies.

      • Jan Irvin
        October 8, 2012 at 9:02 am

        I find it ironic, with everything we’ve been posting on Agenda 21, on Julian Huxley’s UNESCO, etc, that you come back with “but rather a wildlife conservationist”. Please go back and study over all of the notes, etc. Start with the George Hunt UNCED talk at the very beginning of the article, and then come back forward noticing the obvious.

        Also, as a key founder of Apple computers, the most fascist and proprietary of all computer systems, again doesn’t bode well for your argument. If your reading this on Linux in freedom, you deserve some praise. If you’ve spent an extra $1500 for an overprice Mac that has NOTHING inside any different from any other, and you paid $1500 for a chunk of machined aluminum that’s worth a $1.15, then I pitty you.

        Clearly being that this entire thing has been about using psychedelics et al to sell agenda 21 and the environmental movement while ignoring other thing like hemp…

        I’m sorry, but I couldn’t disagree with you any more than I do, and I’m flabbergasted that you didn’t bother with studying through the notes etc, before you posted this. Thanks, Kev.

        • sub rosa
          October 15, 2012 at 10:30 am

          Are you a tea party guy? You think man made global warming is a hoax?

          Laurence Rockefeller WAS a wildlife conservationist, don’t put that in quotes. He played an integral role in the national parks of america. If not for him a lot of that land could have been appropriated to industry.

          He was into eastern mysticism and UFO conspiracies as well. The guy is right up your conspiracy alley Jan.

        • sub rosa
          October 15, 2012 at 10:33 am

          This whole agenda 21 conspiracy was perpetuated by Glenn Beck. If you really don’t believe that all of our fossil fuel extraction has hurt environment than you really are a looney tune.

  45. Ben Steigmann
    September 5, 2012 at 5:39 pm

    On humanism, although I don’t advocate the traditional Christian alternative the author advocates, the following is insightful – it relates directly to your work: http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/TaylorIMMo15.htm

  46. David Llewellyn Foster
    September 6, 2012 at 9:27 am

    This is an interesting “evolving” discourse. Real research takes a very long time and deep research takes even longer, possibly a lifetime. I think it is helpful and important to recognize the difference between cultural delusion through association, as distinct from deliberately planned coherent, strategies of organised social control through specific elite means, deploying cunning methods of psychological coercion. Francis Galton and the rest of his “educated” contemporaries were very much limited by the British imperialist mindset of their times, their predominant codes of conduct, and the types of fraternal groupings that prevailed in support of these values ~ or lack of them… So we must understand the way that most late Victorian English imperialists actually thought & how they were conditioned to perceive the world. Things mutated dramatically after the “Great War” when the USA began to affect the big picture and the global chessboard in such a powerful way, with the growth of Standard Oil and the rapid expansion of American industry generally. One of the most significant words in the international lexicon of cultural experience is “initiation.” “Initiate of what?” and “initiated by whom?” are serious questions that need to be addressed with forensic care in the broad literate context of developed intellectual understanding. A great deal of light has been shed in recent years on the nature of esoteric thought and practice. As a direct result, certain vested interests have raised the bar of disinformation. It is critically important and necessary to be able to distinguish covert actions designed to influence and manipulate events, from from conscious participation of individuals in self-directed ways. When we follow the money, we find virtually all of it eventually sluices through the greasy hands of ecclesiastical powers. Every tyrant needs divine sanction, and all paths lead back to Vatican City, Tel Aviv, Orthodox networks & the Emirates etc. Why do they all hate China so much? ~ fear of ancient, arcane inscrutability. Nothing worries a despot more than the unknown ~ that which cannot be exploited for gain.

  47. Greater Nowheres
    September 7, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    I was reading Paul Weston’s book “Aleister Crowley and the Aeon of Horus: History, Magick, Psychedelia, Ufology” today while waiting for the car to be fixed, and I came across these quotes from Robert Anton Wilson’s “Cosmic Trigger: The Final Secret of the Illuminati” that seemed to pertain to the subject of the Grand Conspiracy in a way that resonated with me.

    ‘In researching occult conspiracies, one eventually faces a crossroad of mythic proportions (called Chapel Perilous in the trade).’
    ‘Everything you fear is waiting with slavering jaws – but if you are armed with the wand of intuition, the cup of sympathy, the sword of reason and the pentacle of valor, you will find there (the legends say) the Medicine of Metals, the Elixir of Life, the Philosopher’s Stone, True Wisdom and Perfect Happiness.’
    ‘You come out the other side either a stone paranoid or an agnostic; there is no third way. I came out an agnostic.’
    There are ‘those without the pentacle of valor who stand outside the door of Chapel Perilous, trembling and warning all who would enter that the chapel is really an insect Horror Machine programmed by Death Demons and dripping fetidly with green goo.’

    Cheers.

    • Joseph Pierce
      September 7, 2012 at 4:50 pm

      Absolutely well quoted and explained, Greater Nowheres!

      Well said by RAW. This “Chapel Perilous” is what I perceive is upon us. Excellent archetype.

    • Ben Steigmann
      September 7, 2012 at 7:54 pm

      Or you come out objective but unaffected. One of the most powerful passages I have ever heard comes from “Gnosis I: The Exoteric Cycle” by Boris Mouravieff:

      “In Western civilization the interior life of the individual, with all its richness, finds itself relegated to a minor role in existence. Man is so caught up in the toils of mechanical life that he has neither time to stop nor the power of attention needed to turn his mental vision upon himself. Man thus passes his days absorbed by external circumstances. The great machine that drags him along turns without stopping, and forbids him to stop under penalty of being crushed. Today like yesterday, and tomorrow like today, he quickly exhausts himself in the frantic race, impelled in a direction which in the end leads nowhere. Life passes away from him almost unseen, swift as a ray of light, and man falls engulfed and still absent from himself.

      When we ask someone who lives under this constant pressure of contemporary life to turn his mental vision towards himself, he generally answers that he has not enough time left to undertake such practices. If we insist and he acquiesces, he will in most cases say that he sees nothing: Fog; Obscurity. In less common cases, the observer reports that he perceives something which he cannot define because it changes all the time.

      This last observation is correct. Everything is in fact continually changing within us. A minor external shock, agreeable or disagreeable, happy or unhappy, is sufficient to give our inner content I a quite different appearance.

      If we follow up this interior observation, this introspection, without prejudice, we will soon constate, not without surprise, that our I, of which we are so consistently proud, is not always the same self: the I changes. As this impression becomes more defined we begin to become more aware that it is not a single man who lives within us but several, each having his own tastes, his own aspirations, and each trying to attain his own ends. Suddenly we discover within us a whole world full of life and colors which until now we had almost entirely ignored. If we still proceed with this experience, we will soon be able to distinguish three currents within that perpetually moving life: that of the vegetative life of the instincts, so to speak; that of the animal life of the feelings; and lastly that of human life in the proper sense of the term, characterized by thought and speech. It is almost as if there were three men within us, all entangled together in an extraordinary way.

      So we come to appreciate the value of introspection as a method of practical work which permits us to know ourselves and enter into ourselves. As we gradually progress, we become more clearly aware of the real situation in which we find ourselves. The inner content of man is analogous to a vase full of iron filings in a state of mixture as a result of mechanical action. Every shock received by the vase causes displacement of the particles of iron filings. Thus real life remains hidden from the human being due to the constant changes occurring in his inner life.

      Even so, as we shall see later, this senseless and dangerous situation can be modified in a beneficial way. But this requires work; conscientious and sustained effort. Introspection carried out relentlessly results in enhanced internal sensibility. This improved sensibility in its turn intensifies the amplitude and frequency of movement whenever the iron filings are disturbed. As a result, shocks that previously were not noticed will now provoke vivid reactions. These movements, because of their continuous amplification, can create a friction between the particles of iron so intense that we may one day feel the interior fire igniting within us.

      This fire must not remain a harmless flare-up. Nor is it enough that the fire smolders dormant under the ashes. A live and ardent fire once lit must be carefully kept alight by the will to refine and cultivate sensitiveness. If it continues in this way, our state can change: the heat of the flame will start a process of fusion within us.

      From this point on the inner content will no longer behave like a heap of iron filings: it will form a block. Then further shocks will no longer provoke interior change in man as they did previously. Having reached this point he will have acquired a firmness; he will remain himself in the midst of the tempests to which life may expose him. This is the perspective before those who study esoteric science. But to reach the state which has already been described, we must from the beginning rid ourselves of all illusion about ourselves, no matter how dearly held; an illusion of this kind, if it is tolerated at the start, will grow en route, so that suffering and additional effort will be necessary in order to rid ourselves of it at a later date.

      As long as man has not reached the point of fusion, his life will be in effect a factitious existence, as he himself will change from moment to moment. Since these changes will occur as a result of external shocks which he can almost never foresee, it will also be impossible for him to predict in advance the exact way he will change internally. Thus he will live subject to events as they occur, always preoccupied by constantly ‘patching up’ (‘replastering’). He will in fact progress toward the unknown, at the mercy of chance. This state of things, named in the Tradition The Law of Chance, or The Law of Accident, is — for man as he is—the principal law under whose authority he leads his illusory existence.

      Esoteric science indicates the possibilities and the means of freeing oneself from this law. It helps us to begin a new and purposeful life; first to become logical with ourselves, and finally, to become our own master. But to begin effectively on this way, one must first clearly see the situation as it is. A parable found in the most ancient sources permits us to get a clear picture of this, and so keep this condition in mind.

      It is the parable of the Coach.

      This image represents the characteristics of man by a coach. The physical body is represented by the coach itself; the horses represent sensations, feelings and passions; the coachman is the ensemble of
      the intellectual faculties including reason; the person sitting in the coach is the master. In its normal state, the whole system is in a perfect state of operation: the coachman holds the reins firmly in his hands and drives the horses in the direction indicated by the master. This, however, is not how things happen in the immense majority of cases. First of all, the master is absent. The coach must go and find him, and must then await his pleasure. All is in a bad state: the axles are not greased and they grate; the wheels are badly fixed; the shaft dangles dangerously; the horses, although of noble race, are dirty and ill-fed; the harness is worn and the reins are not strong.

      The coachman is asleep: his hands have slipped to his knees and hardly hold the reins, which can fall from them at any moment. The coach nevertheless continues to move forward, but does so in a way which presages no happiness. Abandoning the road, it is rolling down the slope in such a way that the coach is now pushing the horses, which are unable to hold it back. The coachman, fallen into a deep sleep, is swaying in his seat at risk of falling off. Obviously a sad fate awaits such a coach. This image provides a highly appropriate analogy for the condition of most men, and it is worth taking as an object of meditation.

      Salvation may however present itself. Another coachman, this one quite awake, may pass by the same route and observe the coach in its sad situation. If he is not much in a hurry, he may perhaps stop to help the coach that is in distress. He will first help the horses hold back the coach from slipping down the slope. Then he will awaken the sleeping driver and together with him will try to bring the coach back to the road. He will lend fodder and money. He might also give advice on the care of the horses, the address of an inn and a coach repairer, and indicate the proper route to follow.

      It will be up to the assisted coachman afterward to profit, by his own efforts, from the help and the information received. It will be incumbent on him from this point on to put all things in order and, open eyed, to follow the path he had abandoned.

      He will above all fight against sleep, for if he falls asleep again, and if the coach leaves the road again and again finds itself in the same danger, he cannot hope that chance will smile upon him a second time; that another coachman will pass at that moment and at that place and come to his aid once again.”

      • Greater Nowheres
        September 8, 2012 at 6:57 pm

        If you came out unaffected, you didn’t visit Chapel Perilous.

        • Ben Steigmann
          September 9, 2012 at 3:48 pm

          You’re misinterpreting the point. This is about an independent sovereignty free of external psychological influences and freedom from conditioning.

          • Greater Nowheres
            September 9, 2012 at 5:18 pm

            I didn’t misinterpret your point, I just understand that it had nothing to do with my post. It was an interesting read, though.

  48. Ben Steigmann
    September 7, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    A text you guys might really like, that delves into this in depth, is “The United Nations Exposed”: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed.htm

  49. September 7, 2012 at 11:03 pm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0oBseWMRQ&feature=youtu.be Watch Offensive: The Story of Tony Farrell for the latest expose on the fascist “false flag” eugenics genocide NWO conspiracy. This is an amazing doc — warning that it’s very graphic about genocide. Let’s remember radiation was promoted by the theosophists as necessary for spiritual evolution. Now consider depleted uranium effects displayed in the above doc. I got arrested protesting against the largest D.U. manufacturer in the world formerly headquarted in Minnesota. http://alliantaction.org/download/pdf/0408whyatk2up.pdf

  50. Craig
    September 8, 2012 at 1:18 am

    I don’t get it, What does this mean? What’s the conclusion?

    • Jan Irvin
      September 8, 2012 at 10:03 am

      Well, Craig, what it clearly says is that the psychedelic movement being sold by Esalen, by guys like Huxley, McKenna, etc, was all based on eugenics and fooling the middle class folks into giving up their autonomy to these humanists, and to get them to further not bread on many levels for their lies and secret agendas. You may want to search “zionism” in the provided database.

      • Joseph Pierce
        September 8, 2012 at 12:46 pm

        Yes, Irvin. I used to sell the Christian fundamentalist gospel of submitting to the lordship of Christ when I was in my younger years. I was also into Jerry Falwell’s Training Champions for Christ and coercive missionary work.

        Therefore, I’m just as guilty and invalid as McKenna, Huxley, etc.

        So people today shouldn’t believe my lies and secret agendas of Christianity.

        Yes, I’m just a wolf in sheep’s clothing and am conspiring within the zionist/christian alliance. ;)

  51. Jan Irvin
    September 8, 2012 at 9:06 am

    New research exposes yet more psychedelic authors caught in the web of eugenics and humanism!

    Thomas J. Riedlinger, author of The Sacred Mushroom Seeker: Tributes to R. Gordon Wasson – is another humanist and Fellow for the Linnean Society of London – a eugenics power house that gives out the Darwin-Wallace award – to eugenicists and humanists like Julian Huxley and John B. S. Haldane (see also today’s other posts on my wall). Humanist/eugenicist Riedlinger also writes for the Journal of Humanist Psychology:
    http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-5102

    “The Darwin–Wallace Medal is a medal awarded by the Linnean Society of London for “major advances in evolutionary biology”.[1] Historically, the medals have been awarded every 50 years, beginning in 1908. That year marked 50 years after the joint presentation by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace of two scientific papers—On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection—to the Linnean Society of London on 1 July 1858. However, in 2008 the Linnean Society announced that due to the continuing importance of evolutionary research, the medal will be awarded on an annual basis beginning in 2010.”

    Oh, BTW, CIA agent Michael Coe who created the 2012 meme in 1966 – well, he was also a close friend of Gordon Wasson’s, aside from Theodosius Dobzhanski – mentioned a few days ago, and Coe’s got a chapter in Riedlinger’s book… coincidence? Bwahahahaha!

    The circle of these psychopaths is getting so tight…

  52. Jan Irvin
    September 8, 2012 at 9:07 am

    More discoveries: Julian Huxley worked with Albert Einstein to sell his humanist bullshit.

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley

    “Huxley also presided over the founding Congress of the International Humanist and Ethical Union and served with John Dewey, Albert Einstein and Thomas Mann on the founding advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York.”

    And see also:
    http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-5337

    Ladies and gentlemen, you’re in a “race” war – and who other than the man who developed the science behind the A-bomb to sell eugenics and humanism?!

  53. Jan Irvin
    September 8, 2012 at 9:07 am

    The latest discoveries regarding Terence McKenna:

    John B.S. Haldane – a large influence on Terence McKenna, was also a key player in eugenics, and also Aldous Huxley’s friend… I’ve now lost count of the number of coincidences – for you coincidence theorists…

    “My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.”
    ~ J.B.S. Haldane

    “It isn’t just stranger than you suppose, it’s stranger than you can suppose.”
    ~ Terence McKenna

    http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-5132

    Author and a source of inspiration
    Haldane was a famous science populariser. His essay, Daedalus; or, Science and the Future (1924), was remarkable in predicting many scientific advances but has been criticised for presenting a too idealistic view of scientific progress. Haldane’s book shows the effect of the separation between sexual life and pregnancy as a satisfactory one on human psychology and social life. The book was regarded as shocking science fiction at the time, being the first book about ectogenesis (the development of foetuses in artificial wombs) – “test tube babies”, brought to life without sexual intercourse or pregnancy. His book, A.R.P. (Air Raid Precautions) (1938) combined his physiological research into the effects of stress upon the human body with his experience of air raids during the Spanish Civil War to provide a scientific explanation of the air raids that Britain was to endure during the Second World War, then imminent.

    Haldane was a friend of the author Aldous Huxley, who parodied him in the novel Antic Hay (1923) as Shearwater, “the biologist too absorbed in his experiments to notice his friends bedding his wife”. Haldane’s discourse in Daedalus on ectogenesis was an influence on Huxley’s Brave New World (1932) which features a eugenic society.

    Haldane was one of those, along with Olaf Stapledon, Charles Kay Ogden, I.A. Richards, and H.G. Wells, whom C.S. Lewis accused of scientism, “the belief that the supreme moral end is the perpetuation of our own species, and that this is to be pursued even if, in the process of being fitted for survival, our species has to be stripped of all those things for which we value it—of pity, of happiness, and of freedom.” Shortly after the third book of the Ransom Trilogy appeared, J.B.S. Haldane criticised all three of them in an article titled “Auld Hornie, F.R.S.”. The title reflects the sarcastic tone of the article, Auld Hornie being the pet name given to the devil by the Scots and F.R.S. standing for “Fellow of the Royal Society”. Lewis’s response, “A Reply to Professor Haldane”, was never published during his lifetime and apparently never seen by Haldane. In it, Lewis claims that he was attacking scientism, not scientists, by challenging the view of some that the supreme goal of our species is to perpetuate itself at any expense.

    • Pacal
      September 9, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      Dear Jan Irvin,Was Jack Herer the Emperor of Hemp $100,000 Hemp challenge apart of the Wasson/Allegro special opts because of his own research into Mushrooms and the Bible with fellow Mushrooms and Mankind researcher James Arthur.I believe you should of “debunked” the HEMP-myth when you started in this field. Wonderful Work Jan Irvin Thank You

  54. September 10, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Hi Jan
    Thought you might like to know that Jack Kirby created the Fourth World without Stan Lee for DC comics – Marvel’s rivals, after a falling out with Stan Lee/Marvel. Apart from the coincidence of the names ‘Fourth World” I can’t see any meaningful connection between Kirby’s ouvre or life that would tie him into any elite or elitist aganda. Kirby was a New York Jew from a poor Hell’s Kitchen background who fought in WW11 against fascism and whose groundbreaking work in the comic book industry consistently reflected a contempt for tyranny in any form. Among Kirby’s accomplishments was pioneering Romance Comics. His life was marked by financial struggle and a struggle for fair treatment against the corporate giants who owned the copyright for most of the material he created. I cannot see the basis for the idea that he was involved in forwarding an elite agenda and he certainly did not benefit from any elite connections or privilege.
    Jan Scherpenhuizen

    • Jan Irvin
      September 11, 2012 at 12:13 am

      Hi Jan, you might want to think for a moment about how a New York Jew came up with the same ideas about mind control set forth in a comic series that just so happens to mimic the Fourth World Council. Yeah, I know, coincidence theorists.

      There’s no way these guys would have produced these comics with these names without inside knowledge.

      It’s funny that you don’t see the connection all the while you address it.

      • September 12, 2012 at 11:51 pm

        Jan
        You might want to think that perhaps people do think before making replies rather than assuming that because they draw different conclusions to you that they have missed something.
        I thought about it for a moment and saw that it is obviously a coincidence. That does not justify you labelling me as a coincidence theorist. On the contrary, it is just as foolish to assume that there are no conspiracies as it is to assume there are no coincidences. To assume either phenomenon is at play before considering the individual case invites error. Having a detailed knowledge of Kirby’s oeuvre and life I judge that you are drawing a long bow with this particular connection. Of course I was aware of the buttons I would be pushing by describing Kirby as a New York Jew. Well he was, so I’m not going to leave that fact out when describing the man. You ignore, however, all of the facts of his life and character which do not fit in with your theory. If fact you do not attribute the creation of his work correctly, he created the ‘Fourth World’ without the involvement of Stan Lee. I think you could at least correct that, even if it is not important to your overall argument. It seems to be his fate to have his work attributed to others.

  55. Ken Sherwood
    September 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    Hi Jan,

    I just wanted to express my appreciation of you for your ongoing updates here in the comments. Thanks! I find your research to be extremely fascinating. My best wishes to you.

  56. September 10, 2012 at 11:21 pm

    Hey, Jan, thank you so much for that German documentary. Wow. I couldn’t even keep up with a lot of the subtitles but I got a lot from it anyway. Plan to gird myself and go back over it. Way excellent, breathtaking, piece.

    I do think you need very seriously to take yourself in hand about Terence… and, well, pretty much the whole thing. Far, far too strident about stuff that was nuanced, calculated to hit even the smartest people right smack dab in the middle of their blindest spots. No way on earth Terence was an agent. Now way he was an idiot, either, even if useful. All you will end up with is rabid twits and no impact if you don’t heed this.

    Go back and listen to Forester in the German documentary, the very old man talking about the limits of math proofs and the wide open field for Theories of Everything. There are huge clues in that. Plus, [1] as long as there is a confluence of world views it will act just as though it were overt conspiracy, with no overt conspiring; and [2] it takes just a rare ill-intentioned few to co-opt any movement and turn it into servicing their ill-intention.

    Stop for stress: ANY movement.

    They are wealthy, powerful, erudite people. They can drop a mere suggestion into an ear at a cocktail party and it’s a lecture in class the next day, or a stump speech for an election, or a sermon in church, or the talk of the town… italics and exclamation points in society rags and trade journals. Not by commanding it, or paying for it, or even asking! That spark, a mere aside in a seemingly innocent conversation, out of a big enough wig, sets politicos, clerics, academics and plain old social climbers, all completely unwittingly, on fire to turn the Titanic to this new idea.

    Terence, at worst, got that offhand aside while still pixied. He didn’t have a mean bone in his body. Maybe he was ultimately no more than a brilliant stoner who got funneled down a convenient track unwittingly, but people of all ages love him to bits and learn a lot from him. They won’t hear of this… and rightly… even if they’d gain much by hearing you out.

    You are too harsh, and that will turn people away whose solidarity might help awaken every Boomer out there unwittingly helping psychopaths rule the world. The stakes are not small.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 11, 2012 at 12:20 am

      Hi Nines, try just studying the material and citations before you give us your emotional appeal. Everything’s right there for you to check out. There is NO WAY that he’s got 40- coincidences here and selling the exact same agendas, admitting in his own words that these people are his largest influences, and hanging out with their families. I appreciate that you all want to believe how benevolent he was, but at least check the citations first. I’ve provided everything in detail for those who care to study. If you don’t care to look and research, and go point by point, then I’m not interested in your comments. There’s only two choices for people who look at the citations unbiasedly – that he was either duped into selling BS, or he was an agent selling BS. I like to think that he was just a well trained willful idiot. I know, things that challenge your beliefs cause cognitive disconnected, don’t they!? But that doesn’t change the facts or citations, and neither do your emotional appeals. If you’d care to go through and show what’s been taken out of context, that would be great. But just ignoring the evidence because McKenna’s the saint of your religion is no reason at all. Thanks.

      • September 11, 2012 at 1:50 am

        The citations have nothing to do with it, Jan. You’ve established his connection, but not that he was horrible, or willfully ignorantly ruining everyone’s lives. You’re too strident about it. Millions of people need to come out of their mental haze and calling one of their very favorite intellectuals “a well trained willful idiot” will snap their minds shut faster than it takes to talk about it.

        You can make your points with a more nuanced understanding, can’t you? You’ve been around these types of people in your life, have you not? Are you too angry to think straight?

        Take that documentary you linked. They did not bludgeon their audience with the seething hypocrisy they were exposing and, bam, it nailed me right between the eyes. Yes, it probably will flow right over the heads of many, and most won’t even endure the whole video.

        I followed the links at Henrik’s place. This is no emotional appeal. I’m asking you to meditate on that little vignette of Forester’s — the 90-year-old — in The Net. Whatever nailed Terence would have nailed you if you’d been in his shoes. Anyone… almost….

        The problem with being such a dazzlingly good researcher is one spends too much time alone, gets, of necessity, too far into the left brain, gets mad! All that effort! I know it. I spent years at it. You get mad. If Terence would’ve been a spiritual master, you wouldn’t have to be breaking your brain right now… right? It’s not his fault. He seems to be culpable to some extent, but it is not his fault. He was doing the best that he could with what he had. That’s obvious. Obvious.

        Honest.

        I am very grateful for your work, and I pay attention when my ducks are in a row. Just don’t be so nasty about it. The facts are lethal enough. You want people to know them! They won’t know them if they won’t listen.

        I have no religion. I’m big on truth… all the way in. Consider Forester for a while. He was a skunk. A very smart skunk, and he was telling the truth on camera. He, or one of the others, might even have told it to Terence and, obviously, Terence didn’t see all the way into it.

        The Achilles Heel is that nice people are very slow to see into what psychopaths are presenting. Think of Rove telling us all we could do about it is record it! Well, we are NEVER going to prove him wrong if we don’t cool off.

        • Ashley Wildman
          September 25, 2012 at 9:36 pm

          nines makes some valid points but so does Jan. Perhaps a middle ground between both points of view would be key?

          • Henk Schafer
            October 22, 2012 at 10:08 am

            Middle Ground
            Also Known as: Golden Mean Fallacy, Fallacy of Moderation
            Description:
            This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that the middle position between two
            extremes must be correct simply because it is the middle position. this sort of
            “reasoning” has the following form:

            1. Position A and B are two extreme positions.
            2. C is a position that rests in the middle between A and B.
            42
            3. Therefore C is the correct position.

            This line of “reasoning” is fallacious because it does not follow that a position is
            correct just because it lies in the middle of two extremes. This is shown by the following
            example. Suppose that a person is selling his computer. He wants to sell it for the
            current market value, which is $800 and someone offers him $1 for it. It would hardly
            follow that $400.50 is the proper price.
            This fallacy draws its power from the fact that a moderate or middle position is often
            the correct one. For example, a moderate amount of exercise is better than too much
            exercise or too little exercise. However, this is not simply because it lies in the middle
            ground between two extremes. It is because too much exercise is harmful and too little
            exercise is all but useless. The basic idea behind many cases in which moderation is
            correct is that the extremes are typically “too much” and “not enough” and the middle
            position is “enough.” In such cases the middle position is correct almost by definition.
            It should be kept in mind that while uncritically assuming that the middle position
            must be correct because it is the middle position is poor reasoning it does not follow
            that accepting a middle position is always fallacious. As was just mentioned, many times
            a moderate position is correct. However, the claim that the moderate or middle position
            is correct must be supported by legitimate reasoning.

            Example #1:
            Some people claim that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good. Other people
            claim that God does not exist at all. Now, it seems reasonable to accept a position
            somewhere in the middle. So, it is likely that God exists, but that he is only very
            powerful, very knowing, and very good. That seems right to me.

            Example #2:
            Congressman Jones has proposed cutting welfare payments by 50% while
            Congresswoman Shender has proposed increasing welfare payments by 10% to keep up
            with inflation and cost of living increases. I think that the best proposal is the one made
            by Congressman Trumple. He says that a 30% decrease in welfare payments is a good
            middle ground, so I think that is what we should support.

            Example #3:
            A month ago, a tree in Bill’s yard was damaged in a storm. His neighbor, Joe, asked him
            to have the tree cut down so it would not fall on Joe’s new shed. Bill refused to do this.
            Two days later another storm blew the tree onto Joe’s new shed. Joe demanded that
            Joe pay the cost of repairs, which was $250. Bill said that he wasn’t going to pay a cent.
            Obviously, the best solution is to reach a compromise between the two extremes, so Bill
            should pay Joe $125.

  57. Stefan Johann
    September 11, 2012 at 4:58 am

    [—>This is written in e-prime]

    Thank you for your investigation into this subject. As I followed Terence over years with great enthusiasm, I read your article with great interest! Very interesting indeed, what you found out about the maybe connections of Esalen.
    I always asked myself, what kind of guy Terence appeared to be, because i admired him a lot. By all means, i had to take care, not to believe everything he said, especially the stoned ape theory and time wave zero.
    I hope the following is not too long, but shall give – a little bit of an account of his character landscape…:

    Terence once said in a lecture which was about the necessity of reducing the human ego, a little bit sarcastically, something like: ´how can someone with an ego like me, talk about the necessity of reducing the ego…´

    If you had some powerful experience with meditation, and especially when you know Terence´s opinion on meditation vs. Psychedelics, you tend to discover his lack of insight of exploring the mind without the use of psychedeics…[sometimes it seemed he insisted strongly on the use of it…later i found out he simply did not know better]

    In ´Appreciating the Imagination´ a talk in Esalen, Terence mentions that once in his life he ´operated on culture, that means that he tried to be someone, career, and find a place in society…

    Terence seemed to often use the word ´WE´, which, when you think about the dichotomy of ´individual-collective´, appears a little bit disturbing…Indeed there seemed to be often contradictions in his line of argumentation.

    However, i found out, if you listen to his talks from the late 80s to the late 90s you seem to clearly observe a shift of his focus on topics from psychedelics to an appreciation of the value of the individual.
    It seems to me, in his last 10 years, Terence got refined, and you can somehow hear that Terence evolved as a character.

    I observe, that by listening to his lectures in the late 90´s, before his death, Terence did not seem to care that much anymore about ´evolutionizing´ humanity by psychedelics.

    For instance, in “the world and it´s double” he said, he doesn´t like the idea of a guy sitting in front of an audience and appearing as an all-wise man. ´I know nothing more than you´ he said.

    When early in his career he appeared to be a psychedelic spokesmen, with may-be influence you mention in your article, he later rather seemed to become something like a cultural commentator and his main focus seemed to be to bring clarity into people’s minds: what is culture? What is ideology? What is belief? ´Reclaim your mind!` he said. It appears to me he simply tried to show that Evolution exists, and that you as an individual are part of Evolution, unlike culture tells you.

    So he says in ´appreciating the imagination´ in Esalen:
    Culture is a simplification and a lie. It is the currency by which fools navigate the world. Smart people get beyond it. You can choose when to do that. I DONT THINK FOR MYSELF IT HAPPENED UNTIL MY MIDDLE 40s´. And then suddenly, because experience and maturation somehow found each other and carried me forward, i began to think like this. BEFORE I WAS IN SENSE A TRUE BELIEVER…for all the psychedelics experiences and political activism i hadn´t yet understood that culture was a vehicle that could only be ridden so far…and then beyond that lies the great and to be defined unknown of one’s own individuality. Many people don´t get beyond the imposed cultural conventionalism…etc..”

    In “a few conclusions about life”:
    The conclusion that i reach visavis the individual and the civilisation is this: culture is not our friend…It s a very uncomfortable set of commodations, that had been hammered out over time for the convenience of institutions. Culture is an illusion…a childish illusion. Cultural defined reality is like an intelligence test…its like a con game…if you play long enough you figure out that you´ve being screwed…We get to soon old and too late smart”

    In his last interview with coasttocoast host he responded to a question, what he would have done different in his life if he had the chance to do so, something like ´he wished he would have been more kind´.

    [In one of his last (and seemingly best) talks , Denver 1999 lecture on youtube—> he gives insight to his late relation to use of psychedelics´:
    “…and if you are not a psychedelic person and non of that appeals to you…that is fine too. that is not a requirement. what is a requirement is moral intelligence. and you have to get it one way or the other in a hurry. The reason i speak for psychedelics is because that is the only thing I have ever seen that works as fast as I think we have to have this change happening…We had great teachers…great teachers…they were crucified, trembled, distorted, ignored, perverted…the right idea is not enough. What is necessary is the lightning strike of true gnosis…HOWEVER THAT CAN OCCUR! As I said, I speak for psychedelics because I have felt their impact personally and I have been with cultures that have stayed close to that campfire and I have seen the beauty the integrity and the humanness of those cultures…”

    Indeed, Terence, as a character seemed to be someone who honestly cared about our species. With no bad intent of whatsoever.

    “The real spiritual frontier lies in the community…we must carry everyone with us´[talk at Earthtrust]

    I always had the impression that the timewave was much more influenced by Alfred North Whitehead rather than Teilhard (not TIELhard) de chardin (esp. if you read science and modern world…Terence often used the term ´Creode´) So says even his brother Dennis in “Immanentizing the eschaton – an interview with Dennis mckenna”. Dennis even further says. “I´m actually the biggest skeptic on the Timewave, even though I was involved in it…” (http://www.realitysandwich.com/interview_dennis_mckenna)

    One should never forget that Terence saw himself as an Intellectual! He was a reader, and compared literature with literature. He did not seem to be a Spiritual Teacher providing universal truth. In a talk with Rubert Sheldrake, and Ralph Abrahams, he said, all he wants is to bring in clarity!

    Terence simply appeared to me an extraordinary curious mind! With a dose of ego, not bigger and not smaller than everybody like us. He strongly appeared to me to have the mind of an explorer! One first seems to need to understand what an explorer may be, than you maybe understand Terence.

    However, it appears to me that nobody else can give a better account of his character than his brother Dennis [from (http://www.realitysandwich.com/interview_dennis_mckenna)]

    Near the end of our meeting, Dennis waxed meditative:
    “Terence is so persuasive and he is such a good talker and he says … he could say complete nonsense in the most lovely way that most people never questioned it at all. He didn’t actually like me to come to his seminars or his lectures because I was the only one who ever argued with him. Everyone else was sort of sitting there taking it all in – ‘Oh wow man isn’t this cool,’ you know – and I would actually stand up and say, ‘Well now wait a minute, what you said makes no sense. It’s a total crock of shit and not only that but it contradicts what you said twenty minutes ago that also didn’t make any sense.’
    And he would of course dismiss that and say, ‘Well, consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds…’ The guy was a fucking genius… I think that he did a service with the way he was able to get people to question their assumptions or to entertain ideas that never in a million years would they entertain. He presented them in such a way that they seemed to make sense at the time, and it’s only a few days later when you think about it that it’s like, ‘What was this guy saying?’” Dennis laughed.

    “I’m critical but I admire him. He was great. There will never be another like him.”

  58. Jan Irvin
    September 11, 2012 at 11:15 am

    I’ve been trying to keep track of some of these great posts, links, and quotes that people here and on Facebook have provided over the last 2 weeks. I put them all into one file, and thought I’d post it here so that others are able to follow along.

    In “The United Nations Exposed”, we find a citation of the UN magnate Rubert Mueller that highlight the significance of what was just revealed: “We were approaching Teilhard’s point of convergence, Wells’ last chapter of The Outline of History … Sri Chinmoy’s world oneness … the apotheosis [deification] of human life on earth.”
    That comes from this chapter. I would suggest using the trivium on this work, I don’t agree with it’s traditional Christian position, but it directly relates to this inquiry:
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed12.htm
    —-
    Brian G.: Jan. Are you familiar with the book “Forbidden Archaeology” by Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson? It’s 800+ pages show very clearly with ample evidence that mainline archaeology since the dawn of Darwinian theory is putting it’s logic ahead of grammar to support Darwinian theory. Evidence suggesting that mankind is far older than the Darwinist narrative accepts is systematically suppressed. And erroneous “evidence” like Piltdown man is instantly and uncritically accepted, as long as it fits with the theory.

    —-
    John Martin: World Evolutionary Humanism, Eugenics and UNESCO:
    Julian’s rap about the need for Eugenics.

    “But once more a new and more efficient method of [evolutionary] change is available. It becomes available to man through his distinctively human properties of speech and conceptual thought, just as Natural Selection became available to life as a result of its distinctive properties of reproduction and variation. Objectively speaking, the new method consists of cumulative tradition, which forms the basis of that social heredity by means of which human societies change and develop. But the new method also has a subjective aspect of great importance. Cumulative tradition, like all other distinctively human activities, is largely based on conscious processes – on knowledge, on purpose, on conscious feeling, and on conscious choice. Thus the struggle for existence that underlies natural selection is increasingly replaced by conscious selection, a struggle between ideas and values in consciousness.”

    “Of course, for eugenicists like Huxley, some are more equal than others.” Brent Jessop

    “There are instances of biological inequality which are so gross that they cannot be reconciled at all with the principle of equal opportunity. Thus low-grade mental defectives cannot be offered equality of educational opportunity, nor are the insane equal with the sane before the law or in respect of most freedoms. However, the full implications of the fact of human inequality have not often been drawn and certainly need to be brought out here, as they are very relevant to Unesco’s task
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/world-evolutionary-humanism-eugenics-and-unesco/

    —-
    “It is as if man had been suddenly appointed managing director of the biggest business of all, the business of evolu­tion —appointed without being asked if he wanted it, and without proper warning and preparation.” “Transhumanism” by Julian Huxley (1957)
    http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/more/huxley
    —-
    Henk S: ‘the Archaic revival’ – Terence Mckenna page 220,

    “What does it mean to accept the solutions of vegetable forms of life as metaphors for the conduct of the affairs of the human world? Two important changes would follow from adopting this assumption:
    – The feminizing of culture. Culture would be feminized on a level that has yet to be fully explored.”

    —–

    “Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion):
    the arguer hasn’t bothered to learn anything about the topic. He nevertheless has an opinion, and will be insulted if his opinion is not treated with respect. For example, someone looked at a picture on one of my web pages, and made a complaint which showed that he hadn’t even skimmed through the words on the page. When I pointed this out, he replied that I shouldn’t have had such a confusing picture. ”
    http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#laziness


    Jarett Sanchez: “What Teilhard was saying here can easily be summed up in a few words,” says John Perry Barlow. “The point of all evolution up to this stage is the creation of a collective organism of Mind.”
    ==>”collective organism of Mind” could have many different outcomes, depending upon the process involved (totalitarianism or something more open), what kind of persuasion is used (deceit or are all the facts and contexts given?), and what role the individual has in relation to the collective– two terms that the logical mind can’t help but to distinguish and which seem to be important philosophical and practical issues to deal with right now.
    It’s not hard to see how de Chardin’s mystical philosophy could be used to argue for forced collectivity.
    Jerett:
    McLuhan was influenced by de Chardin, but I’d have to read the book mentioned in the article to understand in what way:
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.06/teilhard.html

    Eric Cifani
    Mp3 from the meeting inwhich is phrase was developed and the origin of psychedelic culture. http://erocx1.blogspot.com/2009/08/origin-of-60s-alan-watts-friends.html

    Eric C.
    Tim said that phrase was “given to him” by Marshall McLuhan during a lunch in New York City. It was then re-worded by multiple people on Alan Watts’s house boat. I have heard a recording from that very meeting where they discuss this slogan that Michael Horowitz digitized from Tim’s archives.
    Mp3 from the meeting inwhich is phrase was developed and the origin of psychedelic culture. http://erocx1.blogspot.com/2009/08/origin-of-60s-alan-watts-friends.html
    http://matrixmasters.net/archive/Various/193-WattsLearyHsbtSumit67.mp3

    Ben Steigmann Regarding Darwin, you may find the end of this article to be interesting: http://skepticdenialism.blogspot.com/2011/12/evidence-1.html

    Sarah:
    Amazon Review http://www.amazon.com/review/R2J9ZGWRRDUD8N/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0060723513&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=#wasThisHelpful
    http://www.thelemapedia.org/index.php/New_Age
    Key moments in raising public awareness of this subculture include the Harmonic Convergence organized by Jose Arguelles in Sedona, Arizona in 1987; and the wave of interest in the broadcast of Shirley MacLaine’s television mini-series Out on a Limb (also 1987). This was an autobiographical account of her mid-life spiritual exploration. Also influential are the claims of channelers such as Jane Roberts (Seth) and J.Z. Knight (Ramtha), as well as revealed writings such as A Course In Miracles (Helen Schucman), The Celestine Prophecy (James Redfield), Mutant Message Down Under (Marlo Morgan), and Conversations with God (Neale Donald Walsch).

    —-

    INTERVIEWER

    Do you admire Mr. Luce?

    BURROUGHS

    I don’t admire him at all. He has set up one of the greatest word and image banks in the world. I mean, there are thousands of photos, thousands of words about anything and everything, all in his files. All the best pictures go into the files. Of course, they’re reduced to microphotos now. ***I’ve been interested in the Mayan system, which was a control calendar. You see, their calendar postulated really how everyone should feel at a given time, with lucky days, unlucky days, et cetera.*** And I feel that Luce’s system is comparable to that. It is a control system. It has nothing to do with reporting. Time, Life, Fortune is some sort of a police organization.
    http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/4424/the-art-of-fiction-no-36-william-s-burroughs

    —-
    Funny enough, Terence McKenna was fond of quoting P.W. Bridgeman, who was a philosopher of science, stating, “A coincidence is what you have left over when you apply a bad theory!”
    Indeed. So what does that say about a whole string of them?

    Just another tidbit from the great “Bard” himself.

    “there was a sense of incredibly accelerated change…..once I moved to Berkeley I noticed the large billboard……contained cryptic messages that were inevitably addressed to me and my affinity group……in short serious boundary disillusionment and category enscramblement was creeping into my mental universe (audience laughter)…..I had a very strange friend…..he still is my great inspiration. I wish I could coax him into public display because he is the REAL Terence Mckenna. But if you are the real Terence Mckenna you have too much good taste to ever do what I do (audience laughter)……in early 1967 he came to my house one rainy February night….he said….this is a material that has been boosted from an Army research project being run down at SRI (Stanford Research Institute)…someone managed to get a 50 gallon drum of this material out of the inventory without anybody knowing…I said what is it……he said its called DMT.” – Terence Mckenna Under the teaching tree, part 1 31:10-33:33

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HpIyFQxzgU
    Funny that Wikipedia defines a Bard as – “a professional poet, employed by a patron, such as a monarch or nobleman, to commemorate the patron’s ancestors and to praise the patron’s own activities.”

    transcribed from – Psychedelic Salon 116: Terence McKenna, Mark Pesce (on Transhumanism – founded by Julian Huxley)
    ***Techno Pagans at the End of History*** – Esalen Institute, 1998

    TM- “it great what your say about…that we’re trying to push the definitions of Esalen’s relevance, because you know the entire intellectual and spiritual effort here over the past 30 years flys under the flag of the human potential movement…..what we are talking about here and trying to bring gently onto the stage is an enormous frontier of human potential. ***We are to some degree beginning to design ourselves or beginning to design our potential in the service of the idea of the perfected humanity of some sort. And what we are talking about here is not genetic manipulation or eugenics or any of these somewhat dubious enterprises with a clouded history, but using technological prosthesis to extend and enrich humanness to enrich communication….***and it is believe me the want of good communication that is the thing that if…anything undoes us this will be it..that our language has failed that we misread each others intent…that we could not understand each other……” 31:05-32:35


    Ben Steigmann on September 5, 2012 at 5:39 pm (Edit)
    On humanism, although I don’t advocate the traditional Christian alternative the author advocates, the following is insightful – it relates directly to your work:
    http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/TaylorIMMo15.htm
    Ben Steigmann Regarding Darwin, you may find the end of this article to be interesting: http://skepticdenialism.blogspot.com/2011/12/evidence-1.html

    Jan, see the following excerpts from “The United Nations exposed” – they tie right into what you are looking at now – mindblowing is an understatement:
    “UN’s One-World Religion”:
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed12.htm
    “Enviromania”: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed06.htm
    “”Capitalists” and the Communist Dimension”:
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed04.htm
    “Orchestrating the Globalist Concert”:
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/un_exposed/un_exposed05.htm

    Myles
    Off on a bit of a weird tangent I know, but one of my favorite podcasts, we hate movies once commented, “all of the X men stories end in death camps, all of them!”. Well this definitely explains a few things.

    Regarding Terence McKenna comments from Maui, 1994:

    Ok, that’s part of what ***the mushroom said***. And that may seem radical and some circles, but not here perhaps. It also said something else which I rarely mention, ***but since you brought it up***, there are not only too many people, there are too many men [laughter]. And ***I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth***
    ~ Terence McKenna

    “Putting words into the mushrooms’ mouth to promote a totalitarian agenda is just about the most evil thing I can think of.”
    ~ Philip L.

  59. Pacal
    September 11, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    Dear Jan Irvin,Was Jack Herer the Emperor of Hemp $100,000 Hemp challenge apart of the Wasson/Allegro special opts because of his own research into Mushrooms and the Bible with fellow Mushrooms and Mankind researcher James Arthur.I believe you should of “debunked” the HEMP-myth when you started in this field. Wonderful Work Jan Irvin

  60. Ryan G
    September 11, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    “Aldous would follow suit [promoting Darwin’s theory, eugenics] via his novels”.
    I hadn’t read Huxley’s work in years, but I was inspired by Jan’s article above to start looking at Huxley’s work again with Jan’s hypothesis in mind. Jan’s Huxley certainly wasn’t the Huxley I remember. As I read through his work I have yet to find anything that’s damning — in fact, what I find in Huxley’s work is often the complete opposite of what Jan claims.
    What Aldous Huxley novel promotes Darwin and eugenics? What Huxley essay does?
    “Brave New World” is not a promotion of eugenics (if that’s what Jan is claiming here), it’s obviously a warning against it. Perhaps some Americans have trouble grasping the use of irony and black satirical comedy by a dry-witted British intellectual like Huxley? If one thinks the novel is a blueprint for a society that Huxley advocates, one really has missed the entire point — was 1984 also Orwell’s promotional novel about a totalitarian society he’d like to see? Of course not.
    Huxley expresses his feelings directly on a “Brave New World” society in his book “Ends And Means”: “…no reform [of society] which leaves the masses of the people wallowing in the slothful irresponsibility of passive obedience to authority can be counted as a genuine change for the better” (p57).
    Huxley’s play “After Many a Summer Dies the Swan” is considered by some to be a parody of Darwinism. The plot concerns an old rich man trying to find a way to prolong his life, and a clue is found in an old a diary of an Earl from the 1700s, which claims long life is obtained by eating the viscera of a fish that lives 300 years. At the end of the play the Earl is found still alive, but he has turned into an ape!
    Huxley’s “The Ultimate Revolution” speech from 1962 that’s been quoted by Jan (in at least one of his lectures) as evidence of what the psychopathic elites are brazenly planning to do to the rest of us ‘in their own words’. It’s an absurd claim. In this speech Huxley is describing the dangers of a dictator using scientific methods to oppress the masses…only ‘quote mining’ and taking sections out of context can Huxley be MADE to look like he’s ADVOCATING scientific dictatorship.
    In this lecture Huxley says, “The whole picture of the absolute control of the [human] drives is terrifying”, and the use of the imagination to help us avoid the perils in the near future was the purpose of “Brave New World”. “What might happen if these fantastically powerful techniques,” he says, “were used by unscrupulous people in authority[?]”. Huxley says if such an imagination was used at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution the “horrible abuses of the factory system” could have been foreseen, and “western humanity might have been spared about three generations of utter misery which had been imposed on the poor”. Does this sound like someone promoting a genocidal plan to wipe out most of the masses? Is his concern for the poor completely fake? If so, what’s the evidence Huxley means the opposite of what he says?
    In a similar vein, the Bertrand Russell quote “Education should aim at destroying free will…” presented by Jan in one of his lectures as evidence, apparently, that Russell wanted to destroy free will of the masses, is clearly the opposite of what Russell meant. If one reads the entire essay, called “Scientific Technique in Oligarchy”, Russell uses adjectives like ‘nightmarish’, ‘evil’, and ‘horrifying’ to describe his subject. This essay is very similar to Huxley’s “Ultimate Revolution” speech, in fact. But worst of all with this quote, Russell is actually quoting SOMEONE ELSE! The beginning of sentence quoted reads: “[Johann Gottlieb] Fitchte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will….”. Why omit the beginning of the sentence, “Fitche laid it down that…”, except to give the false impression that this is Russell’s sentiment?
    Are these Huxley and Russell quotes simply taken wholesale from Alex Jones without checking the source, or what?
    “R. Gordon Wasson, The Man, the Legend, the Myth” is an excellent piece of investigative journalism. So far, the essay above, in it’s current state, is far from it. I have a huge amount of respect for much of the work Jan has done, I have learned a lot from him, and I look forward to every podcast. But this is not up to his usual standards, and I would like to see him maintain the high standards of evidence he preaches.
    If a straw man of Aldous Huxley is used prop up this theory about Esalen , most of the rest of it falls apart.

    • David Y
      September 12, 2012 at 4:10 pm

      Ryan, the Huxley connection is the one that has *most* (ha) upset my beliefs, so I have pursued all of the links that Jan has provided. I second your sentiments.

      Jan, I would love a little clarification from you or a pointer in a direction that I am missing.

      I see the link to Dialectics–which the sources I read say that he *dabbled* in it at the beginning, presumably pre-Scientology days. Either way, it seems like a harmless investigation–the man *was* writing the “Perennial Philosophy” and would be interested. This isn’t nearly enough to damn the man in my view.

      Next is that Huxley was born a Huxley, thus being born into a family of eugenicists, humanists, and elitests. This in and of itself is not damning evidence. My grandfather was an asshole, what does that make me? Surely Aldous went through a different kind of indoctrination, but his body of work implies that he *understands* the elitist agenda (coming from it) but disagrees with it and spent much time and energy, as Ryan pointed out, warning us of it.

      Then there is a whole slew of damning evidence in the “Aquarian Conspiracy” article. I must admit, the article was difficult for me to read–the author comes across as a homophobic traditionalist and fundamentalist. (“Homosexual drug-addict and City of London agent, Aldous Huxley…” [hosted on biblebelievers.org!!]). Yet I stayed the course, attempted to overlook obvious prejudice for the truths. I’m not sure that I found any… There were definitely some grand claims, but the sources were never credible enough (or accessible enough, tbh) to convince me of anything. And I found some the source texts to conflict with the report by the author. For example:

      “Aldous Huxley was one of the initiates in the “Children of the Sun,” a Dionysian cult comprised of the children of Britain’s Roundtable elite.4 Among the other initiates were T.S. Eliot, W.H. Auden, Sir Oswald Mosley, and D.H. Lawrence, Huxley’s homosexual lover. It was Huxley, furthermore, who would launch the legal battle in the 1950s to have Lawrence’s pornographic novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover allowed into the United States on the ground that it was a misunderstood “work of art.”5″

      The source for the Children of the Sun cult is a book by Martin Burgees Green of the same title, with the google books summary as: “Examines a generation of British men who, in the aftermath of World War I, revolted against their fathers, believing traditional concepts of masculinity led to war, and attempted to redefine manhood. They became known as aesthetes or dandies.”

      Sounds like a totally different book to me… In fact, sounds rather nice!

      That is one of the very first claims in the Aquarian Conspiracy article and I must admit that I originally planned on trying to critique and pry it apart chapter by chapter on here but it just got too taxing. Jan, which bit of this article is truth? Why did you list this article (twice! under different hosts..)? There are entire points on the article that damn certain individuals solely on the basis that they spread “drugs”…

      I’m just confused. Listening and reading Aldous Huxley is far more convincing than anything documented here that I’ve seen so far. But I am open!

      • Jan Irvin
        September 12, 2012 at 5:32 pm

        Start with the database. Read each of the links there, not just one. Read Huxley’s own books, as already mentioned. Study what humanism, feminism, transhumanism and eugenics are, and then make out the clear connections – from their own words and writing, that this is what they’re selling – as it clearly laid out in the many links if you study all of them and not just one. I’m at a loss as to how you could miss all of the other citations and just focus on the one from the Aquarious book. Please study EACH citations. Please read Huxley’s own books. Please study the citations in the database where it clearly says that Brave New World was influenced by John Haldane – another eugenicist. If you don’t ignore and skip right past half the citations, then you’ll find them already right in front of you. If you actually read Huxley, you should already be convinced he’s a eugenicist. But yeah, read the citations that are posted all over the place around here already. Thanks.

        This has already been posted a couple dozen times:
        http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-671

        • David Y
          September 12, 2012 at 6:50 pm

          Maybe I’m just unaccustomed with the database, but when I click on Aldous Huxley I get 6 links: his wikipedia page, two (identical?) aquarian conspiracy pages, a (removed by uploader) youtube link to his 1962 UC Berkley speech, a NYTimes review of selected letters (showing link to Scientology), and a strippingthegurus link (also link to Scientology).

          Then there is lines of connection to a bunch of other people/ideas/groups/etc. Some of them have obvious links, some I don’t understand why they are included. Example right now: Aldous being linked to “Ego Worship” with no explanation that I can see. His connection with a bunch of other intellectuals of his time that were interested in similar things don’t strike me as particularly damning either.

          His work has always stuck me as a warning from a somewhat “insider” that grew some compassion for his fellow humans. But perhaps I need to re-read with your hypothesis in mind.

          • Ken Sherwood
            September 12, 2012 at 11:48 pm

            Hello David Y,

            Google — scratch that; *StartPage* — can be your friend.

            Case in point #1:

            One can StartPage

            1962 UC Berkeley speech huxley video

            and find viable alternatives to that now-defunct link that you referenced. (I’ll admit: in the case of videos, Google can be friendlier in some ways (e.g. more details e.g. video length) than StartPage; pick your poison wisely.)

            Case in point #2:

            Regarding your

            “Example right now: Aldous being linked to ‘Ego Worship’ with no explanation *that I can see*.” (Emphasis mine.)

            it’s clear at least to me that Jan’s TheBrain model is intended to serve as a *research tool*, not as a full-blown tell-all and do-all-the-homework-for-ya type of deal. (I suspect a sly “teach a man to fish” motive on Jan’s part, here, though of course I could be wrong?! ;-) )

            That said, and bearing in mind my “StartPage can be your friend” meme, why not have a go at searching up

            “Aldous Huxley” “Ego Worship” (quotes force *phrase* searches)

            in this case, and similar in all other such cases. Consider key words/phrases found, StartPage *those* in various combinations, and away you go down our favorite rabbit hole.

            ‘hope this helps and now go rock yourself on! :-) Best wishes to ya.

            Ken

    • October 14, 2012 at 6:34 pm

      You say, “Huxley’s play ‘After Many a Summer Dies the Swan’ is considered by some to be a parody of Darwinism.”

      Really? Actually, it’s a regular novel, not a play, though Huxley did write plays. Who considers it to be a parody of Darwinism? You don’t say.

      The story treats the evolutionary mechanism of neoteny in an imaginative way. It’s a good read. I recommend it. But, if you want to understand what Swan is about, you need to read up on the history of the concept of neoteny and its racist applications. Start with Stephen Jay Gould’s book, The Mismeasure of Man. It’s a history of neoteny as an evolutionary concept. I’m tempted write a spoiler, but, no. Instead, READ THE BOOK.

  61. Asol
    September 13, 2012 at 7:41 am

    I tried to leave a comment on the psychedelic salon podcast website a few years ago. It was a negative comment on a talk with Eugenics overtones by A Huxley that they broadcast. The comments never got posted and a lot of things fell into place. Good work Jan. Thanks.

  62. Sandy
    September 13, 2012 at 11:48 am

    Along the lines of reducing the MALE population, check out this documentary: “The Disappearing Male” http://vimeo.com/15346778

  63. Ryan G
    September 13, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    “Read Huxley’s own books…then make out the clear connections – from their own words and writing, that this is what they’re selling”

    I’ve done exactly this, Jan, and I’ve debunked your claim above that Huxley is selling Darwinism, totalitarianism (what you’re referring to as humanism), and eugenics in his novels. His rubbing shoulders with eugenists and the elite does not reverse the meaning of his words. This is a guilt by association fallacy, as others have pointed out.

    If you claim he promoted these things, you’ve, respectfully, failed to understand him, or, if you claim that he meant the opposite of what he said in order to fool the gullible into some secret agenda you’ve got to present SPECIFIC quotes to back this up (Jan, you did a bang up job in “The Holy Mushroom” backing up every claim with primary sources, so I know you know how to do this. Hell, you’ve stressed in interviews for over a year that we all HAVE to do this to avoid spreading mental viruses…I applaud you for stressing this when so few are. So why aren’t you following your own ethics here? Where are the SPECIFIC citations to back up each claim you make above? Repeatedly putting the burden of proof on your readers, referring us to a loose web of (mostly) Wikipedia links in the database, does not dismiss my reasonable doubts, or make for a well-supported argument that would do well in court. I’m not the only reader here looking at the database and scratching their head, wondering where the evidence really is).

    The society Huxley DID promote can be found his novel “Island” (published a year before his death) which presents the fictional island of Pala, a religiously-focused, decentralist entheogen-taking community, cautious of technology, that’s a contrast to the oppressive technocratic society Huxley warned us about in “Brave New World”.
    I would think, based on your other work, that much (but certainly not all) of what Huxley promotes there would meet your approval.

    A way to move this debate forward might be to take the society of Pala in “Island”, what Huxley actually was ‘selling’, and deconstruct that point by point.

    • Greater Nowheres
      September 13, 2012 at 7:51 pm

      Hey Ryan, I actually addressed this in the comments of a previous episode, but it was near the end of the comments section:

      “…here is a link to an article published by the University of California Press by Joanne Woiak, titled “Designing a Brave New World: Eugenics, Politics, and Fiction”.

      http://theburningtree.wikispaces.com/file/view/BNW+Eugenics+Politics+Fiction.pdf

      Do all of us a favor before commenting and trouble yourself to read it before commenting on it.

      Here are a few quotes from Aldous as an appetizer:

      “About 99.5% of the entire population of the planet are as stupid and philistine
      . . . as the great masses of the English. The important thing, it seems to me,
      is not to attack the 99.5% . . . but to try to see that the 0.5% survives, keeps its
      quality up to the highest possible level, and, if possible, dominates the rest. The
      imbecility of the 99.5% is appalling—but after all, what else can you expect?”

      “How do they expect democratic institutions to survive in a country where an
      increasing percentage of the population is mentally defective? Half-wits fairly
      ask for dictators. Improve the average intelligence of the population and selfgovernance
      will become, not only inevitable, but efficient.”

      “But if, as would be the case in a perfectly eugenized state, every individual is
      capable of playing the superior part, who will consent or be content to do the
      dirty work and obey? The inhabitants of one of Mr. Wells’s numerous Utopias
      solve the problem by ruling and being ruled, doing high-brow and low-brow
      work, in turns. While Jones plays the piano, Smith spreads the manure. . . . An
      admirable state of affairs if it could be arranged. . . . States function as smoothly
      as they do because the greater part of the population is not very intelligent,
      dreads responsibility, and desires nothing better than to be told what to do. . . .”

      “A state with a population consisting of nothing but these superior people could
      not hope to last a year. The best is ever the enemy of the good. If the eugenists
      are in too much of an enthusiastic hurry to improve the race, they will only succeed
      in destroying it.”

      “The ideal state is one in which there is material democracy controlled by an
      aristocracy of the intellect. . . . The active and intelligent oligarchies of the ideal
      state do not yet exist. But the Fascist party in Italy, the Communist party in Russia,
      the Kuomintang in China are still their inadequate precursors.”

      “We may either persist in our present course, which is disastrous, or we must
      abandon democracy and allow ourselves to be ruled dictatorially by men who
      will compel us to do and suffer what a rational foresight demands.”

      Huxley seemed to go through a transformation throughout his life. Much like any human being, to tar and feather him as being all good or all evil is an oversimplification, in my opinion. But he most certainly was a cynical eugenicist for a large portion of his life. He was a product of selective breeding, and it seems that it took a substantial period of time for him to soften and show his humanity. But one can argue that the damage of his previous work in mind control was already done. Regardless of how much regret he had for his involvement in some truly horrific schemes, much like Oppenheimer and his creation, we are all left to pick up the pieces in the aftermath.”

      I don’t think that human beings as historical characters can be rigidly put into a box, labelled, and set about as a lynchpin to form a narrative. As I have stated previously, this research is important to me because it pulls the curtain back on the whole concept of narratives. I think narratives are bullshit, be it the “psychedelics are the gateway to human consciousness” narrative, or the “monolithic conspiracy to end all conspiracies” narrative. Often when we are confronted with the true nature of a previously held belief, we then simply create a new one. Being that this subject was treated like a new religious movement by many, I’m not surprised that those who have invested so much in it are constructing a new narrative that is imbued with the fear that comes with that lack of security. This is nothing new.

      Jan and I agree about the hidden hand behind most social movements, but we could not disagree more as to the nature of the supposed opposition. We are all immersed in conditioning, be it the conditioning of the good worker bee, or the conditioning of the extremely wealthy who are steeped in perpetuating the parasitic nature of the system their ancestors worked to put into place. Human beings change. Hell, Jan himself went from true believer to a fierce and somewhat dogmatic critic. Human beings do not exist in a vacuum. Not everyone from Harvard is evil. Not everyone who was associated with Huxley in on the Grand Conspiracy.

      It is evident from Huxley’s early years that he, like many of the philosophical/scientific elite, was swept up in the fervor of eugenics. What most people don’t understand is that most highly educated Americans were, as well, at the turn of the 20th century. Our social programs are steeped in it. From Kellogg, to Harriman, to Walker, to Astor, to DuPont, to Rockefeller, to Bundy, to Ashe, you can see the establishment of this country’s hands all over the subject. And there are still plenty of college professors who openly talk about the need for reducing the population of the world. The difference between you and I talking about the need to limit population and an extremely powerful person talking about it lies in the ability to go about actually doing it on a grand scale.

      Breeding and eugenics have been a part of humanity for literally thousands of years. It’s nothing new, but, unfortunately, it seems that people are just beginning to stumble upon it. The fact that there are active programs that actually exist is not even up for debate. They’ve just re-branded their product.

      From my perspective, the only answer to what’s next for us lies in personal sovereignty. Almost everyone will tell you that they want to be free, but are they truly willing to be accountable for what that entails? If not, then we can continue to bang our heads against an increasingly ominous wall. Or we can go about working on solutions, not as a cog in some template, empty, co-opted movement, but as truly self-sovereign human beings. As I look around the world today, I just don’t see that we’re ready for that just yet.

      If there is some massive psyop or kill-off planned for December of this year, as Jan has suggested may be a possibility, none of this research will matter whatsoever, outside of being trivia, because there is no way that we, as humanity, are prepared to do a damn thing about it. So, unless the plan is to circle-jerk the Apocalypse until it happens, I would suggest that people pry themselves away from the surrogate personas they have created in cyberspace occasionally and actually learn about what personal autonomy actually is. Get to know your neighbor, your farmer, hell, become a farmer. Create alternatives. If the constructed reality you see before you is not to your liking, you have the freedom to drown in two feet of water or stand the hell up and embrace the power you have to edit this program.

      Cheers.

      • David Llewellyn Foster
        September 14, 2012 at 10:58 am

        Thanks for the Joanne Woiak essay link “GN” that looks well worth reading, so I have printed a copy to absorb later. I think your comment is both intelligent and helpful. Arguably one of the best postings on Jan’s site in recent times that I have seen. What you say about personal sovereignty is very true. Most of us spend our lives deceived by some vanity or other, so to be a genuine human being is quite a task, and so far as I can determine very few actually succeed, despite the fact that virtually every moral code and religious ethos purports to be the sole exemplar worthy of emulation. Context and authentic experience are everything, since how we interpret things changes and matures throughout life. Indeed if we heed the wisdom of the Dao-De, those that really do succeed are seldom noticed. So, well said and well written.

  64. David Llewellyn Foster
    September 14, 2012 at 8:18 am

    Eric C. in Jan’s digest above recommends a link to a digitized version of a meeting on Alan Watt’s house/ferry boat in Sausalito Feb, 1967. http://matrixmasters.net/archive/Various/193-WattsLearyHsbtSumit67.mp3
    This is a genuinely enlightening recording, giving great insight into the kind of socio-spiritual enthusiasms LSD25, mescaline and psilocybin disposed these leading figures to embrace and experiment with.
    I moved to Canada in April 1967, and was introduced to Orange Sunshine the following year. The writings of Leary, Watts, Ginsberg, Burroughs, Gary Snyder et al. were all “de rigueur” by the time Woodstock convened. I spoke to Watts by telephone from Nova Scotia in 1969 as I considered his “Joyous Cosmology” a remarkable piece of visionary literature. After his adventures in Algeria although Tim Leary “discovered” Aleister Crowley’s Great Work, in my opinion he did not completely understand the scope of Thelema, but only sampled and interpreted superficial aspects of the Great Beast’s “New Aeon” that chimed with his own ideas without engaging its deeper implications.

  65. Ryan G
    September 16, 2012 at 7:40 am

    Thanks Greater Nowheres, Woiak’s article was excellent. Well argued, well supported with direct quotations. This does fill in some gaps for me concerning the eugenics accusations, as I haven’t read much Huxley’s early work that this essay focuses on. I was most familiar with “Brave New World”, and then books from 1937 onward, where it does appear he changed his outlook, starting from a typical upper-class prejudice favouring top-down social planning, and then ending up in favour of decentralised spiritual democracies (portrayed in “Island”). It’s quite a progression…it reminds me of Malcolm X’s story: a stanch believer in racial segregation, he completely reversed his position later in life.

    Woiak’s article also demonstrates how there were a variety of camps in the eugenics movement, some racist, classist, Marxist…there was a spectrum from abhorrent to ignorant. As time goes on, I think we are moving out of the “Genetic Age”, as it’s realised that genes don’t control everything (people are speaking a lot about epigenetics now). Weston Price proved in the 1930s that nutrition plays a much bigger role in physical and mental health than genetics. Educators like John Taylor Gatto, A.S. Neil, and Albert Cullum also proved that mental ability is much more about culture and education than genetics. Unfortunately, their proofs are still not yet widely known.

    Huxley should rightly be criticised for his prejudiced early views, just as Malcolm X should be. Considering Esalen formed right at the end of Huxley’s life, it would be Jan’s task (to make this Esalen theory hold water) to demonstrate that Huxley never really progressed in his thinking, and that the last 40 years of his life and work were an elaborate ruse. I think this would be very hard to show without digging up some personal letters, or similar material, from his later life, to show he was completely insincere. Without that demonstration, a straw man of Huxley is being used to make the argument.

    Huxley’s complaint about 99.5% of people being stupid, and fears that smart people would be overrun by the stupid, is not that different from the fears in Mike Judge’s film “Idiocracy”. Judge offered no way out, but Huxley seems bold enough to try and offer solutions to this problem. His early solutions were very coloured by his upbringing and class, less so later in life, it seems.

    “I think narratives are bullshit”

    What else do we have? I’m not sure what alternatives there are. Narratives are like maps, you can have accurate ones and poor ones, detailed and oversimplified ones, and they aren’t a substitute for the territory, but they are necessary for navigation.

    • Joseph Pierce
      September 16, 2012 at 6:02 pm

      I would agree with your assessment, Ryan G.

      There are tons of people who aren’t as popular like Huxley. They don’t have his credentials – they’re just average people. And so many of them promoted terrible things early in life. Then later, they had complete paradigm shifts.

      Now, if those unnamed people were as popular as Huxley, they probably would be branded as horrible monsters of the human race just as he has been.

      I’m fine with discovering Huxley and others might have been involved with eugenics or whatever. But, for me it’s just entertainment. Sometimes it’s interesting playing with the life of a dead man.

  66. Jan Irvin
    September 18, 2012 at 8:56 pm

    This was in ’67 when I was a sophomore in college. The interest in altered states of consciousness came simply from, I don’t know whether I was a precocious kid or what, but I was very early into the New York literary scene, and even though I lived in a small town in Colorado, I subscribed to the Village Voice, and there I encountered propaganda about LSD, mescaline, and all these experiments that the late beatniks were involved in. Then I read The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell, and it just rolled from there. That was what really put me over. I respected Huxley as a novelist, and I was slowly reading everything he’d ever written, and when I got to The Doors of Perception I said to myself, “There’s something going on here for sure.
    ~ Terence McKenna

  67. September 20, 2012 at 3:51 am

    I agree with first comment. And I also enjoyed spending countless hours listening to McKenna’s talks and reading all his books 10-15 years ago, and I remember so distinctly back then that passage you quoted as standing out so sorely to me as shockingly wrong, mistaken, misguided, resentful and stupid. Thank you so much for reminding us of these horrid fallacies Terence communicated and propagated.

    However, I must also say that those few minutes of his twisted egoism truly stood out to me among the much more lengthy, encompassing and critical dissections, diatribes and deep forays into honesty and raw poetics which I and so many others loved him for. Keep in mind, that that type of thinking (population concern, feminist reactionaryism, humanist schools, etc.) in the early eighties and into the nineties, was rampant among the psychedelics-using and experimenting communities (perhaps more so with the older hippies than the younger ravers). There are a few other things he said and ways of saying things that I also remember feeling intuitively repulsed by, but so few in comparison with brevity and gravity all the rest. I think this example you give is simply of another Boomer who couldn’t quite free himself of all the brainwashing and mind control he was subjected to (like most all born and developed in this period and culture) no matter how much psilocybin nor cannabis he consumed. In other words, your killing the messenger. Indeed, while you may be attempting to communicate a true insight or revelation, perhaps desperately and for good reason, you are also taking a machine gun to the messengers. It’s very sloppy.

    I’m surprised you haven’t brought up RAW more often. He sorta does comic relief for conspiracy theoreticians, anarchists and psychedelic thinking people.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 20, 2012 at 10:25 am

      Keep in mind, Mr. E, exactly where most of these ideas came from that Mckenna sold – Esalen was behind most of these ideas. He was right in the mix. Please study through the database and look at all of the citations. Thanks.

      And no, I’m not killing the messenger. I’ve been very clear that each and everything he says needs to be checked and do not throw the baby out with the bath water. I would appreciate you not ignoring my well published comments on your claim and use the database to research our citations before attempting to paint innocence and ignorance when his books were also filled with this same stuff. And if you read the articles his is all about, you’ll see that he took his ideas from Coe, Tielhard, McLuhan, Huxley and Darwin – all of whom where close friends or relations.

      • Joseph Pierce
        September 21, 2012 at 10:30 am

        Nice to see Jan literally killing the messenger. I posted a comment to Mr. E yesterday, and it was officially posted for a while on this thread. Alas, it looks like Irvin didn’t simply moderate, but censored my free speech because he didn’t like what I had to say to Mr. E.

        I haven’t seen one example of where Irvin actually admits he has committed a logical fallacy, except the one time he did admit to me he committed the ad bacculum, appeal to fear fallacy. That was back in the Red Ice, Magic Mushroom thread.

        It is exhausting arguing with someone who thinks he has everything down for certain. Claiming people are dumbed down – and when these people do come out of the woodwork, they challenge Irvin’s assumptions. The common assumption most Irvinites claim for people who challenge their theories is “do the actual reading and research.” It’s ridiculous, because none of these people, Irvin included, were present to observe said people doing reading or research! Why make any judgment?

        Jan, why don’t you do yourself a favor. Stop deleting my posts. Refrain from censoring my free speech.

        The Trivium is a good tool to use selectively, but it is not okay to assume people are dumb and incompetent, simply because you ASSUME that they haven’t referred to your sanctified Brain database or trivium criterion.

        I was watching Creationist Ken Ham the other day on YouTube for shits and giggles. He, ironically, emphasises a similar criteria for getting people on the same page: Replacing the corrupt foundation the masses have with a better, more refined, default way of how to think. The Bible.

        I’m fine with the Bible. I’m fine with the trivium. But they should be used without coercion. And ultimately, used without judging people and their experiences.

        Thank you.

  68. Mike Infinity
    September 20, 2012 at 11:34 am

    Just some constructive criticism to the author. It would be a good idea to get an editor or read over what you post a few times before posting it. Your manner of writing is very unconventional and very hard to read. It really does diminish what appears to be great content!

    • Jan Irvin
      September 20, 2012 at 8:23 pm

      For example? And how does what diminish the content? Thanks.

  69. Jan Irvin
    September 22, 2012 at 3:14 pm

    On contemplating the idea of why Sir Thomas Henry Huxley would name his club the “X-Club” that was used to promote Darwin’s theories and eugenics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club), it hadn’t originally crossed my mind that I had done a lot of research on this topic for my first book, about 8 years ago. So I look in Astrotheology & Shamanism, page 152-153, where we wrote this:

    “X marks the spot” is common symbolic usage. In fact, it is universal symbolism. The mark is associated with the perfect man in Psalms 37:37. “Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of man is peace.” The mark of the archetypal “perfect man” is the cross. The cross is an upright X. In Ezekiel, a mark is set upon the foreheads of selected men in Jerusalem and all other men, women, and children are to be slaughtered.

    Ezekiel 9:6
    Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.

    The irony here is twofold: 1) that Huxley and Darwin are using a biblical reference for the club in which they promote Darwin’s ideas, and 2) Their plan for eugenics is now laid bare for all the world to see.

    As they say, “Kaboom!”

  70. Sill Bimpleton
    September 22, 2012 at 11:05 pm

    There is some bad logic in the above claims. Specifically the claim that mckenna and Laura huxley spent time together at esalen is not supported by the evidence. The evidence comes from den.is mckenna who says Laura probably spent time at esalen and may have been there at the same time as terence. This is not the same as terence and Laura spending time together as is asserted. While it may help make the connection between terence and eugenics seem more real it is not consistent with the evidence provided. Thankyou for crrecting this mistake and reanalyzing the connection between terence and eugenics in light of this one less connection being established. Tyvm

  71. Jan Irvin
    September 27, 2012 at 10:50 pm

    Dr. Brian Aker’s article on the McKenna “misinformation”.
    http://www.realitysandwich.com/terence_mckennas_stoned_apes

  72. Mitch
    September 29, 2012 at 11:09 am

    Marshal Mcluhan has been mentioned a few times both by Jan and others. I think it is time to get a Mcluhan expert on because there is a lot more to what Mcluhan was up to and he is be unfairly categorized here. This world of the spectacle is chaos, having given up the ability to decipher content, paranoia becomes the only mechanism by which we can attain order. We don’t need actual reality, we only need the reports, predictions and warnings to make us move. This is as Marshal McLuhan said an illiterate means of classification, a myth, we live mythically now.

    • Jan Irvin
      September 29, 2012 at 11:53 am

      How has he been unfairly categorized? We’ve only commented on him regarding his specific influence on McKenna, on Leary’s Tune In, Turn On Drop Out, and on his influence by Pierre Tielhard de Chardin, who’s behind much of this program. We’ve not attacked or categorized ANYTHING else he’s put out. Thanks.

  73. Mitch
    September 29, 2012 at 1:09 pm

    Perhaps I was a bit strong with the word categorize but there certainly is an air of guilt by association. I can reference (at around 34min mark) your two beers with Steve interview. Mcluhan it is suggested, was nothing more then a stooge of the corporation helping them to manipulate the masses. That simply is not true, in fact Mcluhan was working to update language to help the masses understand what they were dealing with. I’m not trying to be confrontational, I think that you and your audience can benefit from a further study of Mcluhan. An easy start would be the documentary Mcluhan’s wake.

    • October 13, 2012 at 11:02 am

      I agree. Even if Jan not accusing McLuhan of shenanigans, bringing up anybody’s name in the context of this subject matter amounts to implying a nontrivial connection, a causal connection. It drags a name through the mud.

      If grammar is about digging into primary sources, McLuhan’s own writings should shed light. I recommend The Mechanical Bride. There he analyzes magazine ads and comic strips from postwar consumer culture and exposes the tactics that business uses to steer the public mind. He warns that public schooling feminizes boys, professional office work turns people into machines, and pop culture conditions people to be suspicious of ordinary intelligence.

      Maybe there were a million secret handshakes behind the scenes, who knows? But McLuhan did cause a lot of people to think twice about taking their mass-manufactured culture at face value. He encouraged people to appreciate how susceptible they are to being shaped by the gadgets around them and to navigate consciously, rather than on autopilot.

      A couple peripheral points: In his published letters, McLuhan bemoans being blackballed by academic gatekeepers and expresses a suspicion that Masons are conspiring against him. And in his book, Among the Truthers, “journalist” Jonathan Kay, a yeoman serving the upper circles, takes unprovoked potshots at McLuhan, as if to spit on his grave. I suspect the worst you can say about McLuhan is that, if he did petition for membership, the upper ranks turned him away. If that’s the case, I suspect they recognized a loose cannon.

  74. Doc_Luk
    September 30, 2012 at 3:44 am

    First off, thank you for this research Jan. You’ve outdone yourself. That will keep me busy for the next few years!

    Excuse me for commenting before delving deeply into your material but I’ve got another well known researcher that needs looking into. Dr. Rick Strassman has been involved with Esalen since the mid 1980’s, lecturing there about the pineal and consciousness several years before conducting his “Spirit Molecule” studies. I came across the connection while researching his “pineal DMT connection” claims, and apparently he was making those same speculations well before undertaking the studies or writing his book. (I think it’s an example of biased research, but that’s another story…)

    Here’s a link. This book also speaks at length about McKenna’s deep connection with Esalen:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=fzSP6BRFBzIC&pg=PA375&lpg=PA375&dq=rick+strassman+esalen&source=bl&ots=zpz9otyB_5&sig=Y2e_tu3dMpArKK9N7lO0pPrMeGU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hQRoUPrRDKvYigLxsoCYCw&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=rick%20strassman%20esalen&f=false

    Strassman is also an admitted proponent of Huxley’s philosophy:

    “Ram Dass’ Be Here Now “introduced me to the overlap between psychedelics and spirituality, especially Eastern Religions” and, psychedelic favourite Aldous Huxley, in whose The Perennial Philosophy Rick saw “the vastness of philosophical-religious world literature.” Indeed, Huxley’s style was a benchmark: “I loved Huxley’s writing, and decided I wanted to sound as he did when I wrote.”

    http://psypressuk.com/2010/01/08/interview-rick-strassman/

    It’s not my aim to sling unwarranted accusations at anybody, but this may be something worth looking into. I found some of the conclusions drawn in Strassman’s book to be speculative at best, and it seems funny to me that the current DMT craze draws more on the hype and speculation than the actual observed results of the study. I cringe whenever I hear Joe Rogan bring up the pineal…

    I’m going to speculate a bit here…

    College kids these days are urged to denounce anything deemed “unscientific”, and the DMT studies strike me as a preemptive way to introduce these “rationalistic, non-hippie” youth to the idea of psychedelic experimentation. That the studies were done in the mid 90’s after a 20 year hiatus (a full generation) from previous psychedelic research seems more like prudent planning than government bureaucracy. A new repackaging of McKenna’s DMT musings with a fresh stamp of scientific approval just in time for Generation Z to come of age.

    If any prolonged social engineering program is to be successful the “old guard” would need to be replaced as they die off and new messages adopted for the next generation. Is Strassman just another in a long line of useful idiots?

    Also, why is 2012 even mentioned in the same sentence as DMT? I know John Major Jenkins is an Esalenite, but is Pinchbeck also? This isn’t a rabbit hole, it’s a damned cavern.

    • Doc_Luk
      September 30, 2012 at 8:39 am

      Hmmmmm, just found another interesting tidbit.

      Strassman’s research was pushed through for funding at the Scottish Rite Schizophrenia Foundation and NIDA by a man named Dr. Daniel X. Freedman. Freedman was a company man through and through, having headed the Josiah Macy Jr. foundation (a CIA front) and was a friend and collaborator with MKULTRA’s own Dr. Louis Jolyon West. He was also the long time president of of the American Psychiatric Association.

      http://books.google.com/books?id=g19YFuKqKeUC&pg=PT32&lpg=PT32&dq=Dr.+Daniel+X+Freedman+cia&source=bl&ots=Y-78AMGNTY&sig=a5hy1RSib7Ho11H73SPM0M-exkg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=t2FoULa2Oq-MigK6jYGYBw&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=Freedman%20&f=false

      From Strassman’s book:

      “I again wrote Dr Freedman, updating him on the research for human-grade DMT. He scribbled a note on my letter and sent a copy of it to the Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, one of his former students. His telegraphic missive ended: ‘Strassman needs someone at the NIDA responsive. Any suggestions??'” (pg. 113)

      Now, who is Strassman that all he has to do is write up Freedman, one of the most powerful men is US Psychiatry, and his request for funding otherwise “taboo” research is pushed right through?

  75. October 12, 2012 at 11:48 am

    So is the gist here that all of these eugenics guys have been recommending the use of psychedelic drugs to evolve and “contact entities”? Thus mind-controlling the population by distancing them from reality and making them more easily controllable?

    • Jan Irvin
      October 12, 2012 at 11:54 am

      Essentially to dumb down and control, to get the middle class white kids not to reproduce, etc, wrapping the psychedelic movement, in with the feminism, humanism, and environmental movements, which all ties to Agenda 21 essentially. But yes, overall your statement is correct – think of Huxley’s Brave New World, and Soma (Wasson’s mushroom) as one of the many methods. Psychedelics without the trivium is very dangerous. When you’re in the peak state, someone else can put their program in, unless you’re able to spot the fallacies and bullshit and filter them out.

  76. October 13, 2012 at 11:08 am

    Jan, I don’t know what you think of Tarpley, but in this video he makes a reasonable case that eugenic thinking remains central to the ideology of those who see themselves as rightful overlords, including Obama administration advisers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3Eo2YTQUr8

  77. MonkStatus
    October 23, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    Greater Nowheres – I love you.
    Doc_Luk – On Strassman – it’s good that he doesn’t hide the funding from the SRSF – watch this vid at current time from Gnostic Media’s YT channel – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMOC44vby9g&feature=player_detailpage#t=2007s The whole thing is quite informative, and Strassman in this clip, as well as in the Q & A after the film is shown at COSM, is quick to clarify that the DMT/pineal link is strictly his hypothesis & should not be taken as fact. I wasn’t aware of his Esalen connection, thanks for sharing. I worked on the DMT book back in the day @ Inner Traditions International, and met Strassman at COSM for the DMT film showing.

  78. philalethes
    November 2, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    Jan, how do you see the work of Stan Grof who also spent time at Esalen?

    • Jan Irvin
      November 2, 2012 at 6:02 pm

      Nothing on Grof, and I know him. He does rub some interesting elbows, but nothing significant right now.

  79. Eddie
    November 6, 2012 at 12:03 am

    Jan. What are your thoughts on Robert Anton Wilson and his position in the Wasson Brian? Also, I’m confused on how to read the brain. To be clear you are, or are not necessarily implying that every person mentioned in the brain is aware of, or intentionally carrying out this mind control operation? Some of the names mentioned are used as references in other articles you promote. For example, under study materials for the trivium education, there are articles by R. Buckminster Fuller. Under the Wasson Brain, he’s linked to the Esalen Institute. Forgive me if you have already addressed this question in the above comments, for I did not read all the posts. Just refer me to the date above if this question has been more or less been addressed.

    • Jan Irvin
      November 6, 2012 at 8:23 am

      “To be clear you are, or are not necessarily implying that every person mentioned in the brain is aware of, or intentionally carrying out this mind control operation?” – if you read the database, their relation, et al, is stated clearly. As well, on the page to download the database, the instructions are listed. Yes, Fuller is there, but as the citations clearly show, there’s nothing there to connect him to anything else. It’s pretty self explanatory. Obbviously just because someone is in there doesn’t mean they’re complicit. Many are family, friends, or otherwise. Just read the stuff, thanks.

  80. Rupert Gilmore
    March 19, 2013 at 6:07 am

    In saying this…

    “***Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.***

    Another lucky accident was Freud’s inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.

    This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.

    But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.”

    …it is clear to me that Huxley is not at all pleased with the possibilities of mind control technology.

    The “X” club was so named because “it committed [the group] to nothing.”
    (wikipedia article)

    Neither does the wikipedia article make any mention of eugenics.

    I don’t see any support there for your concerns.

    Were the X Club members zealots about naturalism and natural history? Probably. So what?

    • Jan Irvin
      March 19, 2013 at 3:02 pm

      Study the database and all research/evidence provided, including the material at the bottom. Obviously wikipedia didn’t make the connection to eugenics, but if you pay attention to the Huxley family’s promotion of it, and the biblical quote provided, the link is made very clear. So what? Again, study the database and research provided in context of the whole. There are dozens of other posts here that connect the dots for you.

  81. Gleaming Cube
    April 3, 2013 at 10:48 am

    Off topic question about the 2012 deal:

    Why did they change the date from 2011?
    I guess Coe wrote about the 2011 date as well.

    Found this in quick net search (one of many pages):
    http://paranoidnews.org/2011/12/2012-is-the-wrong-date-december-24th-2011-is-the-real-deal/

    They closed comments quick on that one.

    The poster “Will” says:

    “Based on 3D Astronomy programs we are having an unrecognized solar eclipse on Dec 24, 2011! Exactly on the same day as a forgotten Mayan calendar cataclysmic earthquake prediction.”

    Unrecognized solar eclipse? I mean, somebody wanted to hide that obvious real life happening..on that specific date?

    Have not really looked into the date switch issue very much. Also have no idea about the astro significance of that date. Just wondering what info you dug up.

    I mean, if Spock said Dec. 24th, 2011…then you better believe him. Cause he’s all about “logic” ;)

    PS – your PC157 podcast was a great summation of “the situation” out in the world. Great guest. All the info you guys laid out was no hype, no bullshit. Thanks for that.

    • Jan Irvin
      April 3, 2013 at 4:02 pm

      The whole thing was made up. See the 3 episodes with Prof. John Hoopes, who was Coe’s student at Yale. You take astrological events and you set “predictions” with your occult knowledge to control everyone else.

      “Unrecognized solar eclipse? I mean, somebody wanted to hide that obvious real life happening..on that specific date?”

      This is exactly correct. You’ve noted the obvious contradiction.

      Terence Mckenna and Jose Arguelles decided to change the date sometime around 1993 to Dec. 21, 2012, likely because they could drum up more mysticism that way with the ties to the solstice and all. But it’s also possible back then, 46 years ago, that the information on the dating of the 13th Baktun was simply off. You may notice that Carl Calleman used the BS 2011 date for sometime, and then when that passed he immediately came up with some new shit. It’s always the same… mysticism being used to fool and control the masses.

  82. Casey Borchert
    April 11, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    Forgive me if this has already been answered or commented on. Ive read through a few of the threads, watched the videos and looked at the database but haven’t found any answers or thoughts as to why Huxley wrote and gave us Brave New World. On the surface it is obviously warning us of a World State and for many has been an awaking to this possibility (not to say we aren’t in fact there). Obviously they want us to read it. I think its still even in the High School curriculum.
    Interesting that this question could also easily applied to the zeitgeist movies. Showing us all the problems with our govt/society but then giving us the World State as the answer.

    Thoughts?

Leave a Reply