Truth is a slippery thing, revisited

In the beginning of this blog, this was one of my more popular posts.  That it isn't now says something, perhaps.

I think several truths are being withheld from the public. The ones doing the withholding would prefer that the public not know what the truth actually is. The deceptions are many, the actors are many. It is pervasive, there is no shelter from the lies. I've covered the debt limit deceptions in the previous post. But there are more and they are everywhere, it seems.

I think the option of not continuing the negotiations for the fear of default was one of those deceptions foisted upon the public. There was no possibility of default. There was no possibility of not making social security payments on time. There wasn't even a crisis of any meaningful sort- it was being ginned up for some purpose, and now that purpose no longer exists. The crisis atmosphere was in danger, so the lie had to be preserved. Hence the phony bargain was struck, ending the "crisis".

The phony debt crisis is one of the best illustrated examples of this pervasiveness of deception. Another is "climate change". The fact that climate changes over time isn't debatable. The thing that is debatable is whether or not human activity has much of an effect upon it. It can be noticed that there is no longer any discussion about global warming. It has morphed into climate change. Why? Is it because there isn't enough evidence to support global warming anymore? The change in the use of terms was necessary in order to preserve the fiction. In order to maintain the appearance of truth, the story had to get a new name.

What is the real purpose of the phony climate change crisis? Is it to cause the relentless rise in energy costs to the public? Is it to reduce living standards in the advanced countries, so that the emerging countries can raise their living standards closer to ours? If so, isn't there a better solution than this enforced scarcity? It just so happens that the scarcity causes prices to go up, and this certainly can't hurt profits. While profits increase, it allows the pretext for higher taxes and regulations against the energy producers. Behind it all is this deception that there is a climate crisis. If the crisis wasn't believed as real, there would be more energy at lower prices. There would be more energy because there is no shortage of energy resources. Resources are abundant.

Even though resources are abundant, the artificial scarcity pushes innovation. Even that is resisted though, as objections seem to come from directions that you would not expect. Take "cold fusion", for example. The ones who should welcome it the most seem to be the least interested. This is suspicious. Why wouldn't they be vitally interested in this new way of generating energy? The fig leaf to cover this particular bit of deception is the complaint that low energy nuclear reactions, or "cold fusion" is pathological science. In other words, those who support it are crazy.

Besides "cold fusion" there is hot fusion. This does get some respect, and a lot of funding. However, the curious thing about it is that the funding is going to a process that isn't working. The timeline for its eventual success is well off in the future, so that when it does finally work, most of us may already be dead. Either from old age, or enforced starvation by the artificial scarcity. This may seem extreme, but 9 out of 10 calories that you eat are produced thanks to fossil fuels. Remove access to these vital resources, and you will literally starve people to death. Well, at least the mass die off was not in vain. We will save the planet.

Besides the conventional ways toward hot fusion, there are many other experimental pathways towards this abundant source of new energy. Yet they cannot get adequate funding, it seems. Why not? Could it be that somebody doesn't want solutions? You may be thinking that this seems extreme. But wait, the cost of some of these new ideas are not that high. In fact, the costs can be quite modest, so where's the money? The excuse is given that there isn't enough money, but why does it all have to go towards methods that haven't been successful? Shouldn't new ways be sought to solve this problem, or is the problem wanted, as opposed to a solution?

The truth is that there is money. But there is no will to solve the problems. The problems are wanted, because the problems are useful in controlling and manipulating people. So they pretend to solve problems, but the lie is that they, meaning the politicians and their handlers, do not want solutions. They need the problems to continue, so they don't want solutions. They need the problems as issues. We don't need issues, we need solutions. Stop the lies.