Chronos Apollonios' "Home on Olympus"
Star Way, Part Three: Tesla in Wonderland and The Gardens of Deimos and Phobos
Nikola Tesla's Reputation, Microbial Enemies, and Life on Mars
In the course of considering the Mars mysteries- the Mysteries of the Cydonia region, and those of the Templars as I have done on this site's pages, it occurs to me that its getting to be a timely place to bring up what may be the very weirdest things that you will yet find on these pages, which in fact, takes some doing.
It's interesting how in recent months, the prevailing attitude that dodges around the possibility that the artifact on Mars- the face, the Tholus, the pyramids, and so forth- may be man-made, and dodges around the point or the possibility of going there to find out, has suddenly, quitely, somehow changed, as the contents of a recent issue of Popular Science and many other sources demonstrates.
Of course, there's no talk in about going to Mars on behalf of these interesting artifacts, and one quickly gets the feeling from that very fact that that is exactly why there is renewed interest. It greatly reminds one of the position of Mr. Aiwass in recent memory, turning from full denial of the propositions of West, Schoch, Hancock and Bauval, and carrying on like he was the first to admit the possibilities instead of the last. Fortunately, as Mr. Data on "Star Trek" so aptly said "you mean we can learn something from non-disclosure?". Sure, as any poker player knows. "The guilty dog barks first", we are often told, and failing that, often the loudest.
One could only wish for real, open and honest cooperation with the public on things like this, instead of the cloak-and- dagger cr*p, and of course, as so often when there are so many chiefs and so few Indians, it gives one the sinking feeling that, as usual, this mere shadow of cooperation is on the verge of once again doing something that is very likely to be monumentally stupid.
Granted, maybe I just have a problem figuring out how the proposed inflatable habitat is going to possibly stand up to the micro-meteorites that are supposedly so fond of raining down on the barren planet, with no appreciable atmosphere to oxidize them into submission, and the gnawing feeling that what will ride in to the rescue will be Tesla's scalar "bug zapper", that our government supposedly has been, and probably had no business whatsoever, already testing with undue enthusiasm. Half the sorrow of that of course, will be that while they were busy raiding Tesla's legacy, that they've very likely kept the bathwater and thrown out the baby, repeatedly.
Now, it's in the course of seriously thinking over this Mars stuff that I come to owe the impeccable Mr. Tesla an apology, namely for thinking he had a looney streak for thinking he had picked up radio signals from Mars. After the momental- literally- amount of eye-catching artifacts on Mars, it's very unlikely anyone would have left all that and not some sort of beacon as well, just in case, and in fact, if there's anything we know about "the Martians", we know that they and Mr. Hoagland tend to think much alike. That Tesla may have in fact done exactly this seems to be making more sense by the minute.
Of course, I'm not the first one to question Mr. Tesla's sanity, and in fact that's a sad part of the history of exactly how he got written out of history and suppressed, by being made into another specie of the unappealing vision of eccentricity we are given of Howard Hughes. The fact, however, is that even if these reports of his peculiarities are true, it may be that these "mathematical quirks" he is reported to have had happened to be his particular form of mental excercise. It may be how he kept himself perpetually in a state of mental fitness where he could do in his head what most people cannot even do on paper. We might as well criticize Bethoveen for constantly puttering away at the piano, Einstein for continually daydreaming up his "Gendanken" experiments, or athletes for constantly working out to keep in shape.
It seems that the very flames of prejudice and bigotry themselves have been frantically fanned in order to sweep such a conspicuous luminary under the rug.
We can certainly also understand any objection he may have had to working on paper, or keeping paper lying around. Such a practice has literally been the undoing of far too many other suppressed or forgotten geniuses.
There is one other "peculiarity" that Tesla reportedly possessed, besides his "eccentricities" of counting his napkins and making sure his steps on walks totalled to numbers divisible by three, and that the increasing fear of germs that he allegedly developed as the years went on.
Now, supposing that as usual, just for the hell of it here, we owed him yet another apology on account of that... What exactly are the ramifications?
Did he once again know what he was talking about? Could he have had real grounds for concern? What do we, in fact, who may be poised to posthumously hand out straighjackets to Mr. Tesla, actually know about the subject that makes us qualified to dispense such undignified apparel?
We also know that Tesla's prodigal prowess with electricity was such that he was literally on the boderline of being a god... what if he had turned his unparalleled talents toward devices such as microscopes and telescopes? His knowledge of fields and scalar application of Fourier Transforms are only two of many many possible ingreedients he could have used to prepare magnifying and imaging equipment that remains beyond what the world possesses at present.
We still can rule out the possibility that the "occult" visions of the Theosophists in reality came from a device of Nikola Tesla, and more than we can rule out that if C. S. Lewis based his "Aslan" on the Face on Mars, that this too wasn't on account of an effort of Tesla's. What if Tesla's fascination with biology had secretly extended to a logical extention, a fascination with pathology, and exercises in subtractive as well as additive reasoning in regards to "The Problem of Human Energy", as he put it? Quite simply, and quite reasonably, what if he had been studying germs all along, and knew much more about them than many people may know today?
Most of all, what if his views were expedited by being based on the premise that the Theosophists had already developed, their deeply disturbing and rarely repeated premise that the primary advantage of human mortality, or what superficially appears to be human mortality, is that it is simply of advantage to certain organisms to which human beings are universally host?
We also have a problem in the "Star Way" arena, of ancient and occult microscopy, that in the event that it ever happened through human faculties, we know very little about these faculties, and even less about their logistics.
I have managed to find virtually nowhere in any literature any reference to what evolution, for example, might wish to tell us about such facilities. We can imagine, with the ever prevalent problems that micro-organisms create for mankind, that evolution indeed should have given us the power of microscopy. Indeed, we have popular television programs that make microscopic studies of average households. "If we could only see what was crawling on us now", they say. (Of course, it seems as if no human being is able to stop and make an issue out of that very thing without being branded a lunatic, a fear-monger, or both, even while news and advertising for disinfectant products perpetually bombard us with the slightest titillating inklings that there is an issue, something that is both troubling and conspicuous in itself).
If evolution would have favored such a development as the "human microscope", why didn't it happen? Or did it? We have seen much in the occult about faculties which every human supposedly possesses, but not all are aware of, and we have even seen where some occult powers are attributed to pathologies (not that they are in themselves pathologies, as the mental profession delights in insisting) even by occultists.
Unfortunately, the answer may lie in part in the unruly habits of micro-organisms themselves, it may lie in part in human behavior, and it may lie in part in the fact that evolution, if that is the principle we are experimentally employing for the moment, may have been kinder to those organisms who can crank out billions of descendants in a single day, and of course there is no end to our evidence that these very micro-organisms readily pull off all sorts of adaptive behaviors even in their own single lifespans that we can't pull of in our own.
Of course our ability to see them would likely result in our efforts to extinguish them, so their greatest prerogative would be to evolve in such a way that they're better at dampening such a human ability than we are at maintaining it.
But this, even for the sake of candor and expediency, is getting ahead of ourselves here. You might have a hard time swallowing that premise if you didn't start closer to the beginning of the story of just what microbes are capable of. Viruses, for example, are still more competent and accomplished genetic engineers than we are; in fact we've got a lot of mileage in genetic engineering out of utilizing that fact. They also may have great proficiency in gene-swapping, through a process called transfection, which is of course to their advantage instead of ours.
If we give the occults the benefit of the doubt, some pathogens seem capable of inducing occult powers, probably if and when it serves to upset us, run down our immune systems, and give them further right-away, and even this makes a plausible amount of sense.
And yet, we have some curiously Pavlovian attitude that these things that are smaller than us are somehow our servants; we employ micro-organisms for a hoarde of purposes, from the leaven breads that may not be the best for us, to fermenting the alcohol that people in recovery may hardly think of as a favor to mankind. For every pain we take to prevent their effects on our enviroments, we still have many seemingly pre-programmed attitudes toward them. We don't take them for granted, yet we do. It's a bizarre picture, really.
Candace Pert, who discovered the opiate receptor, soon discovered that the HIV virus has a protruding tag that fits the opiate receptor. This alone may tell us, logistically, much of what is happening with this virus. If it sits on this receptor, and then the immune system launches its attack, it may damage the nerves that the virus sits on, and spill calcium from nerve channels into the blood. This may well be, for example, why an excess of calcium ions in the blood has been associated with AIDS dementia- and other forms of dementia. Likewise, it's not hard to imagine it isn't just HIV that has such a property. The pain-inducing powers of colds and flus, and a number of ailments, might have similar modes of operation.
It's also been discovered that magnetotactic microorganisms, magnetic bacteria whose only goal in life is to travel to deep into the ocean at the earth's equator, can sit on the receptor sites of birds. There's a pretty disturbing picture that one can extrapolate, of these organisms hijacking birds, of forcing their seasonal migrations to these more equatorial climes, and conceivably pumping them full of vasoconstricting hormones, causing them to freeze to death if they don't comply. It's already reported to be known that they affect the behavior of birds by causing them pain if they don't respond with certain behaviors. It's amazing to think that these migratory birds, and other migrating creatures, might not be so prone to death by the elements, perhaps, if it weren't for these magnetotactic hijackers, and human beings are also full of them.
Pathogens that modify the behavior of the host should be anything but unknown to us, if we look at all the odd aspects of illness, and all the advantages it provides those illnesses to spread- coughing, sneezing, doing so too abruptly to have time to cover one's face, making one so weak and miserable they may forget to wash their hands, etc., etc. It also goes for needing a hug when you're sick, because it brings people close enough to spread the germs effectively, but it is also very characteristic of opiate receptors in need of triggers, as those who have adopted the slogan "hugs, not drugs" must surely know if only by intuition. Somewhere in there of course, is the role that these organisms may play in human substance abuse, and its not a pretty picture. And all of this, of course, may be just the tip of the iceberg. In the long run, they may be at the bottom of much of humanity's discontent, and man's inhumanity to man.
Somewhere in the huge cloud of human denial that surrounds the issue, of course, denial that is itself characteristic of manipulated opiate receptors, one starts to find some peculiar things. It was mentioned as an incident in some material they were presenting regarding Broda Barne's thyroid-centered approach to medicine that a study had shown that our intestinal flora, if they are not fed a certain texture of bran, secrete estrogen. It's a finding that doesn't deserve to be played down like it has been, and it certainly seems to contraindicate the rather presumptious classification of these organism as symbiotic.
Imagine this getting through the classical egotistical Judeo-Christian ego-structure: "Dammit, the Lord God made me complete and perfect as his handiwork and I don't need no bugs in my guts to help me digest my food!"- that might be more like it, in fact. Were it only that we could even get a denial on this matter! Indeed, whatever these microbes may or may not be up to, how docile and credulous we have been nonetheless, even the most strong-minded and cantankerous of us, while these organisms have been, we are told, cheerfully tampering away with our sex hormones, amongst many other tamperings with the human body attempted by pathogens, many of them lethal.
I'm not sure we have any business referring to such a relationship as a "symbiosis" anymore. The fact may yet be, if anyone will cough up the courage to look into such a matter, that these "benevolent" organism may be fufilling a role we could have handled ourselves were our ability to do so not damaged by perhaps the very organisms in question. It's a little like being stood up by the same person who knocked you down, again and again, or being sold the cure by the person who poisoned you, perhaps.
It gives one the uncanny feeling that our "servants" on whom we depend to break down refuse into compost have mistaken our guts for a compost heap, perhaps through some ongoing vicious cycle of astonishing resemblance between the contents of the two, and decided to work their universally destructive magic of breaking down all types of matter upon us instead.
One doesn't have to sit very long and ponder, in fact, on this universal destructiveness, and our own digestive processes, one the agents it takes to accomplish that process, where else we can find those agents in nature, and we get a rather distrubing picture to pile on to the Thesophist's assertations, one in which the only reason that human beings assimilate and excrete matter solid and fluid in the first place is for the very same reason they tell us we leave a corpse- because it provides a vehicle for certain micro-organisms to flourish, and to spread out of the crowded hosts they as use as factories for their mindless numbers of themselves.
It's a picture where our output of digestive fluid, stuff designed to break down matter of every type, has too much in common with the venom of insects and reptiles whose venoms have the very same idea in mind, to break down organic biological molecules of all types- phosphatases, aminases, you name it. If we were talking about human beings ingesting this much venom on a daily basis, we'd not be hard pressed for ideas about why the human lifespan is so tragically short, and while we may take the taste of our own medicine better than we take it from the deadly creatures in question, there may well still be a powerful point to be gotten at here.
Strangely enough, we haven't really improved our methods of eliminating or decontaminating human waste in thousands of years, which itself is greatly advantageous to the organisms in question.
Likewise, we may not yet have one clue exactly what magnetotactic organisms are doing inside the human body. Granted, we can theorize quite well that they are essential in "biomagnetic" processes, which include pumping ectoplasm, but we have no idea what they are "really" for, and the fact that they somehow dabble in an extraordinary form of magnetism that we don't even understand isn't encouraging either. We'd have every right to be suspicious.
We also have every right to be suspicious of virtually every "symbiosis" that happens in ecosystems, perhaps much to the chagrin of even enviromentalists. While all of these are deemed "necessary" in practice, and may be, at least in the sense that some of them are "beneficial" to us because micro-organisms warring between themselves may grant our tired immune systems some reprieve, none of these "symbioses" may prove to be consistently required enough we should be so sure. There is much that is done with plant tissue, for example, in completely sterile enviroments.
Here we are, and President Clinton's epoch making announcement that we have discovered DNA- living molecules- in space, has somehow been buried under the scandalistic nonsense of his possible extra-marital affairs. Were these only days when the American people still had the guts to show a little of the spirit of the times of the Kennedy adminstration, when people had some sense of bigger things, and some sense of pulling together to meet the unknown.
While I may sound like I'm waxing paranoid here, this is still only the beginning of what we haven't yet dared to look in the face, and the problem here is that for all we know, even while we're making preparations to infect other planets with the earth's "beneficial" microscopic life, that microscopic life may not only be the worst thing that ever happened on the face of the earth, it may be itself singlehandedly responsible for the entire human condition for all we yet know.
We have also been told, far aside from this context, that certain microbes on this planet are able to act as a single organism. While we are told this casually, the ramifications of this are almost unthinkable. Exactly how do they manage to do so? Its suggestive of a quantum function, like a huge quantum computer, and some of the possibilities in these somehow uncharted waters are as disturbing as they are odd. This level of organization, of course, would be one of the most fearsome qualities to find in an organism.
We have no idea of the possible impact of magnetotactics which can function this way at a quantum level, and I am on the verge of adding hypothetical speculation that the "secret ingreedients" used by alchemists are ones which ultimately may compensate for effects induced by magnetotatic organisms on all larger living things; in other words, the reason that organisms do not spontaneously regenerate, be it rapid or substantial healing, or be it spontaneously rising from their own ashes, is because of the presence of magnetotactic material, which may take the time-altering properties of these materials and direct them against the living non-microbial organism.
If this is the case, without such an observation, it is difficult to possess a category to which such "secret ingreedients" belong, so that we may identify them, but the fact remains in apparently every account of palingenesis by alchemists that the heat which we know to be antagonistic to magnetic fields is an instigator of the reformation of form from the ashes of that form.
These migratory hijackers could yet prove to virtually be synonymous with human mortality, and the instigators of all other opportunistic acts of other microorganisms and pathogens.
The simple fact is, if these are the answers, they don't happen without the questions getting asked. There's enough of a hint of corroboration for some of these notions that they don't go away easily, whether its the fact that magnetotactic crystals from animals have long been associated in magick with quantum computer-like effects, to the proposition that the gums and resins traditionally implicated in some modes of palingenics being perhaps all inherently anti-microbials, to the possibilities that the long-lasting disorientation of one experimenter with a master magnet not fastened down properly were effects that happened though the magnetotactic components of his biology.
The latter instance implies a possible form of retaliation by these possibly invasive organisms, perhaps in response to the sort of force required to de-magnetize their unusually and inexplicably tenacious magnetic fields.
We should like to hope that simply passing a magnet over cremated remains could remove the magnetatic material, which may not be permanently demagnetized by cremation, and reverse whatever forces these materials may subject these remains to, be they entropic, or gravitational, or what, but it may not be that easy. We are just beginning to know of these things at all, let alone know that much about them. We don't even know that they are from earth, and we already possess some indications to the contrary.
If we need an explanation why the generous and expressive Tesla, complete with his "pathological" fear of pathogens, may have been reluctant to give us the technology to get us to Mars, or even a sliver of the information that he may have possessed about the red planet, maybe this is exactly why.
It's a long shot, but in the fact that all he was willing to discuss was the fact that he received scalar radio signals, is there a hint that this was because he was secretly adamant that we should master scalar technology- a technology that could no only facilitate teleportation, but could do so with the potential of the remarkably "Star Trek" concept of transporter biofilters- filters that could screen out and remove micro-organisms that could be within a host body?
In the end, there's a very good chance that what he knew and we didn't included all of this, and while he may or may not have plotted mechanisms of overcoming such a mode of disease (he likely did), his "pathological" fear of germs may well have been an understandable aversion to pathogens, and we should know far better by now than to be laughing up our sleeves at the man who knew and invented everything.
As a final note, by the way, lest you think me mad alone, while I've been adding the finishing touches to the page and trying to get up the courage to put it forth, some of the burden has been lifted. While I will be reserving comments on this material for appearance on this page for some future time, and I will do everything I can here to lend much more of the much needed perspective on the matter, I will refer you here to something I highly recommend reading:
The Atlantic Monthly, February 1999 "A New Germ Theory" pg. 44-53.
After all, it only makes sense.
Visitors since Feb 13, 1999