Anthony Patch Sep 15, 2017 | Akimondo's Rant

[akimondo]

Article 1 (http://www.zdnet.com/article/russians-test-a-gun-that-turns-people-into-zombies/)

Written in 2012 by Tuan C. Nguyen for ZDnet.com, a technology news site owned by CBS.

For the record: I'm not saying microwave weapons aren't real, I'm just saying they're nowhere near as advanced as Mr. Patch would have people believe. Also, I'm saying this is a VERY poorly written article.

Mr. Nguyen starts his article by writing:

"It's been widely speculated that the U.S. military has been developing weapons with the capacity to scramble brain activity. . . "​

Although it's probably technically accurate that "It's been widely speculated. . . " (of course depending on the definition of “widely”) it's also the worst type of journalism. This statement has no source, it's simple hearsay. He then goes on:

"If so, we might be seeing a new kind of arms race. . . "​

Again, he isn't lying, it's just that by saying "If so," everything that follows is dependent upon the presumed speculation by the unspecified people in the previous sentence. Nothing new has been brought to the table this far. Anyway, he goes on:

". . . as a new report claims that the Russia government has been testing a gun that does exactly that."​

Okay, that's better. There's "a new report." That's interesting. Except there's STILL NO SOURCE. Only later do we find:

". . .Australian publication The Herald Sun reports that Russia's main man, President Vladimir Putin, plans to have them ready within a decade. . . "​

Oh look, it's a link. Finally, we have a source. Well, ALMOST, The Herald Sun refers to president Putin and defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov, but that's it. When and where did they say these things? Nobody knows. Why? Well, it takes a bit of digging, because sources-schmources, right? Just trust the media. Hahaha. But Forbes actually say they're quoting the Daily Mail. EXCEPT, if you read the DM article it says:

"Sources in Moscow say Mr Putin has described the guns, which use electromagnetic radiation like that found in microwave ovens, as ‘entirely new instruments for achieving political and strategic goals’."​

Oups. "SOURCES in Moscow," how awkward. But I'm sure it's an honest mistake. I mean if you're a journalist, reporting on Russia, you can't be expected to be able to tell the difference between the president and people in Moscow, who're NOT the president! That's clearly asking too much. Hahaha. I have zero training in journalism, and I'd do a better job than Mr. Nguyen. This also explains the diplomatically stupid quote from president Putin:

"Such high-tech weapons systems will be comparable in effect to nuclear weapons, but will be more acceptable in terms of political and military ideology."​

It is in fact a source saying that Putin has been overheard saying this. Of course, that actually makes it more believable, if this is a trustworthy source. But writing about it as if it's from some kind of press release, just makes it sound like fake news, to make Putin look bad. This also explains the disconnect from what Putin has allegedly said, and what Serdyukov has been directly quoted as saying:

"When it was used for dispersing a crowd and it was focused on a man, his body temperature went up immediately as if he was thrown into a hot frying pan. . ."​

They're NOT talking about the same thing. The above seems to describe a version of ADS. And, in the end, Mr. Nguyen concedes that:

". . . the effort to come up with something that can enable bona fide mind control has proven immensely challenging, despite decades of work . . ."​

And he even writes outright that:

"Right now, there's no indication that anyone's perfected anything close to an actual "zombie gun". . . "​

Followed by the icing on the cake:

"MSNBC's science editor Alan Boyle says he's skeptical of Russia's claims and that we probably shouldn't expect a brain-frying gun for a very long time: [Mr. Boyle says:] '. . .there's nothing in the comments from Putin and Serdyukov to suggest that the Russians are anywhere close to having psychotronic weapons."​

Microwave weapons are real. To some extent. But this article is so bad it borders fake news. It is no more than sensationalizing a whole lot of common knowledge, to drive traffic to ZDnews.

 

[akimondo]

"Article" 2 (http://www.mgr.org/Bioeffects_of_Selected_Non-Lethal_Weapons.pdf)

Credit should be given where credit is due, and this is another great find! Very interesting as it seems legit. It's too bad it's from 1998, but if it wasn't old, it wouldn't be released to the public, naturally. And it's a bit scary. Because how far have they taken these things in nearly two decades? Much further, no doubt. But to Anthony Patch's sub-atomic targetting from a distance? I have yet to see any evidence of that, anywhere.

I really recommend that everyone read this addendum, but since everyone doesn't have the time, I'll just go ahead and say that there is nothing mentioned that supports the more outrageous claims of Anthony Patch. Such as specific memory manipulation. The effects described in "Addendum to the Nonlethal Technologies - Worldwide (NGIC-I 147-101-98) study" are more broad, and crude, like brain damage, seizures and unconsciousness.

For anyone who listens to Crow and Jason on Crrow777radio, it could be an interesting tidbit that the addendum says:

"In a study of the effect of RF radiation on body temperature in the Rhesus monkey . . . "​

For those who who don't follow Jason and Crow, the idea is that things are tested on Rhesus monkies because the intent is to create genetic-specific effects. Meaning the things (weapons, really) should, by extension, affect human beings who are Rh+ but not Rh-, which the "elites," allegedly, are. You can find some basic Wiki info here and listen to the free hour of the show here.

 

[akimondo]

Article 5 (https://www.cnet.com/news/billy-cor...n-into-something-non-human-smashing-pumpkins/)

Written October 2017 by Chris Matyszczyk for cnet.com, a consumer technology breakthroughs site, owned by CBS.

I don't want to be rude, as I really appreciate you taking the time to add to the thread, Shamangineer. Especially when some of it has been really good stuff (and you've inspired me to make better posts with links and embedded media). But you can't go from an ex-rock star's anecdotal story to higher dimensional space. The same could be done for almost anything. A reptilian shape-shifter, a glitch in the matrix, a non-physical spirit entity, a magician using a spell, a psionic super soldier, or a robot with a holographic projector. The leap from Corgan's story to anything concrete, is so long it cannot be made while bringing logic along. Especially when he has said in this interview that:

“The Pumpkins used to play gigs on hallucinogens . . . mushrooms or LSD. . . ”​

And in this interview it says that:

"Until recently, there were plenty of mornings when he'd wake up to a stark choice: 'Go eat breakfast, or go kill yourself.'"

"In a way, the Pumpkins' entire catalog was one long, loud cry for help, broadcasting Corgan's leftover pain from a childhood filled with abuse and neglect."

"Corgan was a lonely, traumatized kid, born into a world of dysfunction and addiction."

"He's also begun work on a book about his journey into the idiosyncratic New Age spirituality that he believes saved his life and his sanity."​

Does hallucinogen use, childhood trauma and New Age religion automatically take away somone's credibility? No. But like Anthony Patch (who clearly has no higher education in STEM areas, and believes in the bible) and Tim Rifat (who's clearly either a fraud or completely insane), Billy Corgan is NOT a source that is going to change my mind. On anything, really. He could be telling the truth, sure. But with everything he's been through, and the fact that I don't know him, I'll go with "cool story, bro." And, again, to me, Occam's razor places this in the category of ex-drug user's brainfart, long before it has anything to do with higher dimensions. To me an angle of "Weird Scenes inside the Canyon" or general MKUltra seems more related to Corgan's story.

 

[shamangineer]

Explain this one without higher dimensional aspects to reality (I'm afraid hallucinagenic brain fart won't cut it here):

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/28/s...a-of-multiple-personality.html?pagewanted=all

 

[akimondo]

Shamangineer, I hope you're not misunderstanding me. I'm not trying to be antagonistic or to come across as if I see through these things at a glance - as if they're obvious. They're not. I've spent hours, several hours, looking through and looking up things related to the articles you've posted. EMF, MASERS, LASERS, Orch OR, quantum computers, AI, Frequencies, Heim theory, radios, scanners, synthetic telepathy, non-lethal weapons, mind and machine interfaces, nanotechnology, nanotoxicity, wifi, cell phones, radiation, cancer, and much more. It's been quite time-consuming, but very rewarding.

And, to be clear, when I make fun of Tim Rifat, I make fun of Tim Rifat, not you, Shamangineer. If I had just read his article once, to take in the information, and not investigate it, I'd have said "Okay" in the end. And, of course, just because he's a crackpot or fraud, it doesn't mean all his information on microwaves is bad. But he's not going to be the one that changes my mind. In my view, his data becomes corrupt when he's clearly not reliable in several instances. The same goes for Mr. Patch and Mr. Corgan.

Also, when I say Mr. Corgan's brain fart, that isn't, in some underhanded way, aimed at you. Since your posts are shorter now (and I get and respect that), perhaps I misunderstand. But to clarify my point, you are, of course, completely entitled to your opinion and your interpretation. And I didn't mean to say you were wrong, just that there are several explanations. And that, using Mr. Corgan's testimony, a "bridge" cannot be built from it to any one single conclusion that excludes the others. There simply isn't enough information. The bridge can be built using speculation, however, and then it's fine. I'm all for saying Mr. Corgan's experience could be explained using a higher dimensional model of reality. And, perhaps, that was all you meant to say.

I'll post about the other articles later.

 

[shamangineer]

I get it, I was very skeptical of all of this myself, but the more you dig the more you find. Occam's Razor cuts both ways, and there are pieces of evidence that do not fit the standard model. Dismissing pieces out of hand because they are "crazy" or "theoretically impossible" doesn't help as much as putting them in the "interesting, but unconfirmed" category for further review with more evidence. My posts have been shorter because while one can lead a horse to water one cannot make it drink, I felt I was coming to the point of diminishing returns in the course of the conversation. I can provide quite a bit more supporting evidence in certain areas, but I would rather prepare for the upcoming episode at the moment as I have to search to find evidence from research I did perhaps ten years ago and it can be difficult to find sometimes.

WIth regard to David Icke and Billy Corgan, I wouldn't say their statements are definitive evidence for a multidimensional reality, but I was hinting that the truth is out there for you to find and Mr. Icke is not alone in his view of the possibility of a kind of projective shape-shifting of some people. In some instances I think this is more of an aural effect that only certain people can observe, but in other instances it may take a full physical manifestation - I have not observed it myself, but I have come across enough references to the effect that I hold it in the realm of high probability. With regard to people with multiple personalities physical manifestations have been observed repeatedly and in the case of someone who was "possessed" or "over-shadowed" by a higher dimensional entity how different might such a state be from a shift in personality in someone with multiple personality disorder?

I don't mean to demean or degrade your arguments, many of them are quite valid, but I think you would benefit from having a bit more of an open mind on some subjects and I would encourage anyone to research all subjects I discuss for themselves. There was quite a bit of "rant" in some of your more recent posts and I felt it might be more productive to provide more evidence to support my arguments than to dissect your posts.

And yes, the last post was intended as a challenge. I understand it is hard to come from a materialist scientific or "rational" mindset and find evidence you can corroborate enough to have confidence in, but there is a lot hiding under the scientific carpet that is not disseminated widely.

 

[akimondo]

I get it, I was very skeptical of all of this myself, but the more you dig the more you find. Occam's Razor cuts both ways, and there are pieces of evidence that do not fit the standard model. Dismissing pieces out of hand because they are "crazy" or "theoretically impossible" doesn't help as much as putting them in the "interesting, but unconfirmed" category for further review with more evidence.

I 100% agree. I just don't want to fall victim to confirmation bias. So, let's say I see a "UFO." To me, it would be a mistake to immediately say it’s a flying saucer, go to a MUFON site and conclude from their information that it’s a grey ship from Zeta Reticuli. UFO simply means Unidentified Flying Object. I’m not saying it’s necessarily something mundane and boring like swamp gas or a weather balloon. But it could be spirit-related, for example. And just losing oneself in alien speculation blocks investigation into other areas.

My posts have been shorter because while one can lead a horse to water one cannot make it drink,

You know it's water, but I have to make sure it's not kool-aid!

I felt I was coming to the point of diminishing returns in the course of the conversation.

Please note that my next comment is delivered in a friendly and respectful manner. I can see that, but from my perspective, that was because the sources in part got worse. And, I hope it has been evident that I consider this a friendly debate, not a competition. Saying a source isn’t good enough for me isn’t a childish way of trying to “win,” in fact, I don’t consider that a win at all. Orch OR and the quantum aspects of photosynthesis, for an example, completely toppled my argument that coherence cannot happen in biological systems. And I thought that was great, Orch OR is super interesting! Same thing with the ether idea. Between ether and Einsteinian space-time, I’m going with ether.

I can provide quite a bit more supporting evidence in certain areas, but I would rather prepare for the upcoming episode at the moment as I have to search to find evidence from research I did perhaps ten years ago and it can be difficult to find sometimes.

I can imagine. Please do provide more supporting evidence, it’s much appreciated. But wait until after your next episode! I definitely don’t want to get between you and your best possible presentation. And, just so you know, I think your episodes are among the very best ones that THC has to offer.

With regard to David Icke and Billy Corgan, I wouldn't say their statements are definitive evidence for a multidimensional reality, but I was hinting that the truth is out there for you to find and Mr. Icke is not alone in his view of the possibility of a kind of projective shape-shifting of some people.

I find David Icke interesting, for sure. I even own two of his books, although I've only finished one of them. That said, the reptilian shape-shifters go in the "interesting but unconfirmed category for further review with more evidence," for me.

In some instances I think this is more of an aural effect that only certain people can observe, but in other instances it may take a full physical manifestation - I have not observed it myself, but I have come across enough references to the effect that I hold it in the realm of high probability.

This reminds me of what Peter Mark Adams said about being the only one seeing the pillar-like light-beings around the channeler. And how one guest, maybe Steph Young, told a story about having seen a "ghost," where she saw (as I recall) a glowing sphere and the woman she was with (who was convinced it was the ghost of a boy) saw the ghost of a boy. Or Lorna Byrne, that Mark Booth mentioned, who talked to angels that he could not see, but that she described in ways that made sense with what he had read about them. And, of course, there is the pop culture reference of "Truesight" in Stranger Things S2. Reality is "weird," for sure! But in what way, exactly? I don't know.

With regard to people with multiple personalities physical manifestations have been observed repeatedly and in the case of someone who was "possessed" or "over-shadowed" by a higher dimensional entity how different might such a state be from a shift in personality in someone with multiple personality disorder?

I read the article and it was very interesting andI'll get back to it later.

I don't mean to demean or degrade your arguments, many of them are quite valid, but I think you would benefit from having a bit more of an open mind on some subjects

I’m going to disagree here. I think I need to be more skeptical and more critical. And definitely look things up before I believe them. I realize I’ve been much too forgiving toward people telling their stories in alternative media. Just going along dumbs me down. I could have just gone along with what Anthony Patch said, as he threw technical words around. But that’s his whole shtick. Use big words that seem complicated, and hope nobody has a degree in physics. Alarm bells went off, but I didn’t know enough about the topics to say exactly why. So, I could have been dazzled by the “deep research.” But after many hours over many days, of looking into his claims, I’m more certain than ever that he, like Tim Rifat, is either a kook or a fraud.

and I would encourage anyone to research all subjects I discuss for themselves.

Yes, I agree, it really makes a big difference.

There was quite a bit of "rant" in some of your more recent posts and I felt it might be more productive to provide more evidence to support my arguments than to dissect your posts.

Considering the name of the thread, at least I can't be accused of false marketing.

And yes, the last post was intended as a challenge. I understand it is hard to come from a materialist scientific or "rational" mindset and find evidence you can corroborate enough to have confidence in, but there is a lot hiding under the scientific carpet that is not disseminated widely.

If that's how it has seemed, then you might enjoy this. The basis of my rejection of Mr. Patch's claims isn't just that the technology is, in part, science fiction (and that he has strung it together into an inescapable, dystopian, doomsday scenario, solvable only by converting to his religion) but also that he holds a materialistic view of human consciousness. He's saying that there is a one-to-one direct causal link from sub-atomic matter to every aspect of the mind. If memories, thoughts, and dreams can all be completely controlled by tinkering with tiny marbles in our brains, well, then matter is primary and consciousness secondary. To me, that's absurd.

From my perspective consciousness is, in Bohmian terms, to the implicate order as the implicate order is to the explicate order. The furthest reaches of consciousness are mystical, reaching what has, among other things, been called Atman or Buddha nature. And as it says in the Avadhut Gita "More subtle than space itself," and "neither can it be said it is, nor it is not, what a great mystery!" To me, these things are not the results of specks of matter. And they defy machines. Otherwise, if Anthony Patch was right, we could have samadhi, satori and gnosis by pushing a button on our cell phone in the future. Personally, I don't think that's going to happen.

My view of the relationship between the mind and the brain is more in line with that of Dr.Bruce Lipton. Who says intelligence is in the quantum field and that the cells are receptors acting as instructed by that field. Meaning mind transcends brain. And, by extension, it escapes complete domination or mapping from any machine, particle or electromagnetic wave.

Please don't respond until after the next episode. And good luck!

 

[genxgemini]

Yowser, this one generated some heat,eh? It challenged me to hear him out all the way too. Like many of you, I cringe a little when folks get all biblical. It's hard to ease those defense mechanisms without a different context,ya know. HOWEVER, this episode REALLY opened my eyes to 5g & generated MUCH food for thought about what is coming next. Spooky shit,man =D