A Short Course in Comprehensive Thinking – Part 13 – How I Developed My Comprehensive Perspective

The foundation for comprehensive thought needs to be conservative, not speculative.

I developed my comprehensive perspective over many years, and while I dipped into the fringes, most of it is invalid. There is nothing “wrong” with fringe topics, but a lot of work, keen discernment, and a scientist’s skepticism is required to successfully navigate the fringes. Otherwise people go down rabbit holes to nowhere, never to be seen again.

Comprehensive perspectives cannot be built on the sand of most fringe topics. There is valid information on the fringes, even world-changing, but it is not easy to find. For all of the fringe topics that I consider valid, my opinion was formed from my experiences or of those close to me, and rock-solid scientific and scholarly findings. I am going to provide some examples.

1. When my family changed our diets to whole food when I was 12, that was my introduction to the fringes. It caused a health miracle for my father, which was considered “impossible” at the time by Western medicine. The book that inspired us was banned in the USA the next decade, but today, its banned advice is orthodoxy’s first line of defense. That journey took over 40 years.

2. Dennis Lee’s heat pump is the world’s best heating system, and I have provided several scientific tests of Dennis’s heat pump (1, 2, 3, 4). I also covered the garden-variety thermodynamics of why it is the world’s best heating system. It is pretty simple stuff, really, and has never been credibly refuted. When the “skeptics” are not lying, they can’t string two rational thoughts together.

3. When Dennis was in solitary confinement, I met with a former policeman whose advice was critical in my springing Dennis from jail a couple of months later, in the biggest miracle that I ever witnessed. That policeman wrote a book about his adventures, and one chapter was about how he learned that Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill JFK. I never doubted his account, but I spent 12 years examining the JFK evidence before I publicly wrote about it. I never saw one piece of credible evidence contradict that policeman’s story, and as more evidence has come to light, it only further confirmed it.

4. Ed Herman’s Propaganda Model has never been credibly challenged, nearly 40 years after he first presented it, and his scientific approach has never even been addressed by his assailants, who lie and fling mud instead.

5. Quite a few fringe topics are invalid, such as faked moon landings, the idea that Antarctica was ice-free in historical times, or that celestial events wiped out the megafauna. But I had to do my homework to conclude that.

6. I would have never explored metaphysical topics unless I had my mystical awakening, which was based on dramatic experiences. Brian O’Leary had an almost identical experience five years later while performing the same exercise, which ruined him as mainstream scientist, as he could never again drink the materialist Kool-Aid of mainstream science.

7. If I had not had people close to me witness free-energy demonstrations, I would not be promoting the idea of free energy. I don’t really care much about the many alternative physics models out there. Only when those technologies become publicly available will the “winner” of alternative physics models emerge, but I suspect that some kind of unified field theory will prevail.

8. I would not write about organized suppression unless I had lived through it.

9. My epochal framework of the human journey was based on many years of study, of the best scientific and historical findings that I could find.

10. Encountering Bucky Fuller’s work was how the comprehensive lightbulb finally went on for me. I had been developing a comprehensive perspective, but all on my own, groping along. Reading Fuller’s work took mine to the next level.

In summary, I could not have developed my comprehensive perspective without the bedrock of experiences and study of the highest-quality work that I could find. It was a very conservative process. While I entertained plenty of fringe ideas, few passed muster, as the fringes are filled with chaff, particularly work of a conspiratorial bent. Global conspiracies indeed exist, but nearly all conspiracists bark up the wrong trees, as few of them do the hard work (which includes becoming scientifically literate), practice discernment, and relinquish their tribal, fearful, victim-oriented view of the world. Only people who think like creators are fit for this duty, and creators create with love.