Thank you, Wendy. As someone who tries to get things done and/or changed and/or just left the Hell alone in my small city, the single biggest hurdle for me is getting people to let go of their polarities. Let’s say there’s trash on the beach that should be picked up but isn’t. Just get a group of people equally fed up with the unsanitary beach and do it. It doesn’t matter what they did last week, or who they voted for or whether they eat meat. All that matters is doing it. And that is why our small cities and towns are falling apart and becoming unlivable. Because the people at the top are geniuses at polarizing people into meaningless factions so that nothing gets done to just make life a little better today.
Polly, you’ve got the right attitude. The beach doesn't care about the culture war. Neither does a pothole, a broken streetlight, or a kid who needs a mentor. But the system works overtime to make sure we care about everything except the thing right in front of us. That's not an accident. And you're right: the only way out is to stop asking "which side are you on?" and start asking "can you help me pick up this trash?" Appreciate you.
Hi Wendy. Thank you for another thought-provoking essay. I agree completely that the great faultline of our civilization is that the hydrocarbons running the show are becoming more difficult to extract and therefore more expensive, and cannot sustain the built-in requirement for growth the global economy demands. (Another way to look at it would be more and more energy goes toward obtaining more energy, whether that be building a massive concrete pad for a windmill or fracking tight oil from a well in the Permian basin, rather than toward building and maintaining infrastructure, producing consumer goods, etc.-- ie. growing the GDP. )
But is hiding that fact really the reason behind all the noise, the tactical deployment of “ambiguity increasing” as a weapon in the information war?
Nate Hagens is just the latest in a line of writers and researchers attempting to bring the oil situation to the forefront.I’ve been following the oil “situation” for over 20 years now (yikes), first through environmental concerns, then by following writers like John Michael Greer and Nicole Foss and Gail Tvorberg who emerged from the peak oil movement.
By the time I took a bus down to Washington, D.C. to get arrested in the 2012 XL pipeline protests, I was already feeling a lot of congnitive dissonance based on my understanding of EROEI and it’s relationship to the financial system, as well as Foss’ statement that "Any civilization that can produce solar panels can't be run on them." which encapsulates concepts like system complexity and embodied energy. So even while being handcuffed and shoved into the back of a police van, I could see the (unavoidable) hypocrisy of 350.org and similar environmental alarmist groups.
In the years that followed, I started to question the fundemental mythologies and histories of our world, so that, in 2020, I was ready for the covid op and subsequent lockdowns. No shot for me, thankyouverymuch. Any remaining doubts about questioning every single thing went completely away.
Which is to say, the facts about oil depletion, EROEI, collapse of complex systems, etc. have been out there for a long time–M. King Hubbert published his peak oil “theory” in 1956. (I put theory in quotes because oil being finite and therefore subject to a peak is a fact, not a theory. The theory part I suppose is speculating when that peak would occur. More on this in a moment.) Yet this is not common knowledge, as you rightly point out.
But is it really because of the increasing amount of conspiracy theories and binary arguments flooding the digital waves? Or is it maybe something else? Or a combination?
I suspect the biggest impediment to a wider understanding of the role oil plays in the fragile nature of our status quo is our complete faith as a society in the Myth of Perpetual Progress. (This is perfectly illustrated in this context by a line from the Wikipedia entry on Hubbert’s peak oil theory:
“The development of new technologies has provided access to large quantities of unconventional resources, and the boost in production has largely discounted Hubbert's prediction “ The entry also mentions BOE–Barrel of Oil Equivalent–which covers solar, wind, nuclear, etc., which I would say qualifies as ambiguity increasing.)
There is a certain, rather small segment of the population that apparently has the ability to dismantle this myth. Whether that has to do with some childhood trauma, a genetic disposition toward skepticism, or who knows, but it is not necessarily simply book learning; that will fail without the reception activated.
I have a number of intelligent friends who, for example, thought fracking was only about natural gas, and insist that solar and wind or nuclear fusion or some as yet undetermined energy source (talk about magical thinking!) will come along soon. So I don’t think all the ambiguity is generated for that main reason. But of course all the confusion helps with the achievement of many other goals desired by the PWB (People Who Benefit). You could look at it in relation to the shock doctrine and disaster capitalism
You say we should ask “Who benefits?” My question would then be, How, and Why? Is it just to gain more power and money? Is it to ultimately set in motion a massive die-off, so there will be more resources and many fewer humans? Certainly if the standoff in the Strait of Hormuz continues we will likely see mass starvation in many parts of the world.
Finally, in one of your comment replies you write:
“Better to figure out how to navigate the transition than focus on whether these narratives are true or not. It's like arguing how to arrange the furniture on the Titanic. Better to focus on how to get off before it sinks.”
Early on, I was studying permaculture, wondering about moving to a more rural area and homesteading, learning how to shoot, etc. Now I realize, I am in this particular time, and there is no jumping ship. The thing to do is to befriend the passengers next to you, and enjoy the band.
(By the way, spooky AI illustration! Looks like data centers are poised to be the next ambiguity increasing.)
I had to stop reading at “oil being finite”. Do you mean to tell me i can't have abiotic oil? Are you saying the precious planet isn't filled with a creamy crude nougat center? Im going to have to go for a drive in my F250 and think, then post a rant.
And actually the data center issue raises another puzzle in your theory. The same people responsible for the AI/data center issue are the ones who are trying to hide the oil situation. They must then understand our natural gas and coal will not support all these planned centers. Sometimes I wonder if the PWB are actually NitWits.
Hi Mark, long time no hear. Nice to see your wisdom here again. You've clearly been on this road much longer than I have, and I appreciate you sharing your journey. The fact that you got arrested at the XL pipeline protests while already doubting the environmentalist framing speaks volumes. It's humbling and rewarding as a writer to have intelligent, experienced people engaging with what I write.
You raise a fair point: is the oil/finance fragility really the reason behind all the noise, or is the Myth of Perpetual Progress the bigger impediment? I think both. The myth makes us receptive to the noise — we want to believe something will save us, so we grasp at competing narratives (solar, fusion, free energy, whatever). The "free energy" narrative, for example, serves the same function as any other: it keeps people dancing in circles while the shearing continues.
Your question about the PWB being nitwits made me laugh. But I don't buy it. Central Intelligence is not Central Stupidity. As Lara Logan said, the NSA is the crown jewel of intelligence collection — they don't "miss" things. So when I see chaos, I don't see incompetence. I see an act. The full wits aren't visible actors; they hire the actors. They know exactly what they're doing. They are masters of manipulation and mind control — and we have the factual history to prove it: Operation Mockingbird, MKUltra, COINTELPRO, and more.
The more important question, to me, is why so many people let the system study them so intently — to the point that it knows more about you than you know about yourself — and still trust the performance. And what are the movie makers hiding behind specific narratives like "free energy"? What is that particular plant designed to deflect? (I'd say: the real limits of EROI and the debt-energy trap.) And if that virus and those vaccines were engineered, then what for? Maybe to manage the crisis that's coming with energy? When you lay out all these narratives on a table and you identify how each one is diverting attention...it's clear. At least to me.
So I'm always looking behind the curtain. Thanks again for pushing me to think harder.
With all the narratives on the table, you can begin to piece together a mastermind plan to deal with that crisis. If you were the mastermind, and you saw an energy cliff coming, you might conclude there shouldn't be so many people on Earth consuming so much. It's ironic that AI consumes enormous energy — it's accelerating the collapse. Maybe that's also controlled demolition toward their plan. Or maybe it's part of dumbing people down and distracting them. But they definitely have a plan. Central intelligence is not stupid. I don't have it all figured out, but I have a general idea.
Regarding free energy, that one has a long history as well--back in the 1950s, aka the atomic age, the head guy at the atomic agency promised nuclear energy would be too cheap to meter.
No doubt there are enough evil geniuses among the nitwits to create havoc. But let us not forget the immortal words of Robert Burns: "The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men / Often go awry"
Which is funny, because I am (sort of) trying to write a post of my own on substack, with the tentative title, My Theory Is, It's All A Conspiracy, with the tagline:
Row, row, row your boat gently down the stream;
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a scheme!
Wendy, I look forward to your publications, you make me think about things through a different lens than those I am typically using. This one, however, seems a bit doomer-ish with respect to the sense of urgency. I watched each of Nate’s videos, very likely directionally accurate but perhaps 100-200 years premature. If forced to bet, I would take the over, 200+. I agree the bulk of societies everywhere resemble the young fish in David Foster Wallace’s beautiful 2005 commencement address “This is Water”. There is a shockingly low appreciation for how the world works (energy is life) and so much entitlement among the resource rich. But we are extraordinary at innovation and procrastination, such that I think it will be a very long time before we truly face a shortage of affordable energy. The definition of affordable may evolve but I would not bet on a near term shortage of the natural resources - supply chains may become disrupted, but not the ability to access the resources below ground.
I think the twist is in the relationship between debt and energy. They do not operate independently. So let's see how it goes. I'm not as hopeful as you are, but I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong. I hope I am. Truly.
I do pride myself on challenging intelligent people to think differently. 😉 If I can do just that — without changing anyone's beliefs — then I think I've succeeded in my mission as a writer.
Thank you for being here. I appreciate your thoughtful comment.
I'm struck by your equation that "energy"="carbon-based energy". That false equation was "pushed" by those who were tagged "greenies", the "low-wits" for the carbon-based economy. That economy feared the real financial/political challenge--but I repeat--of atomic energy. You nailed the importance of "energy"; you missed the nail and hit your thumb by focusing on the "story" that "energy"="carbon-based energy."
Hi Derek. Thanks for the sharp critique. You're right that I defaulted to "energy = carbon" — and that's worth examining. I'm not an expert, but rather reporting on what I've come to understand from people like Steve St. Angelo, Nate Hagens, etc. They've convinced me.
Nate Hagens (whose videos I recommended) directly addresses your point. He argues that energy quality matters as much as quantity. Oil is liquid, energy-dense, portable, and storable. Nuclear delivers constant high power, but it's difficult to ramp up/down, capital-intensive, and requires grid infrastructure that itself depends on fossil inputs. More importantly, our entire mining, shipping, rail, trucking, and personal transport system runs on oil's unique properties — not just kilowatt hours.
Hagens also notes that alternative energy tech (including nuclear) is "rebuildable, not renewable" — it requires massive material and energy inputs every 20-30 years. And we've never in history fully transitioned off an energy source; we just add layers (Jevons paradox).
So the question, I think, isn't whether nuclear could play a role. It's whether it can replace oil's systemic function at scale and speed, at the pace EROI is shrinking. Hagens says no. And our wars suggest the same.
Watch his Energy 201 and 301 videos. He walks through all of this without the carbon-only assumption. I'd be curious if you still think I missed the nail after watching. If you do, let me know exactly where. Nonetheless, I appreciate the pushback. It's good for me — and for readers. Again, I'm not an expert on energy. Just trying to see the big picture, trusting others who have made the most compelling arguments to me.
Appreciate the push. We are all trying to build a complete picture from puzzle pieces. Another influential figure in my thinking, now gone, is Michael Ruppert, author of Confronting Collapse: The Crisis of Energy and Money in a Post Peak Oil World — and this film: https://youtu.be/eLLl5NOLdwA?si=cd6Zzjk28vMUUoj0
Regarding energy: Oil is not a fossil fuel from the perspective of scarcity, and is renewable. There is no shortage and never has been. That disclosed it is horribly polluting, oil spills and fires are the consequences, for which there is no viable solution.
Nuclear Powerplants produce an abundance of energy, are relatively contained,
and new techonolgy a tiny fraction of the previous size. They produce spent fuel rods with half lives of radioactive isotopes that are lethal if uncontained for thousand of years. Scatter bombs with radioactive isotopes very likely explain what occured in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
The promise of free energy from the "ethers" / non polluting, infinite, solves most of humanity's problems, instantly. If I had to wager has been discovered and harnessed a very very long time ago. Dramatic claims do require dramatic evidence.
There sure are plenty of narratives around oil. Free energy? I do think this is constructed narrative, as tempting as it is to believe. It serves the good-evil narrative structure — and that's what I forgot to include — narratives that reduce to good and evil are usually constructed to play people. Isn't it interesting, dating back to that tree: knowledge of good and evil? Such a trickster that tree.
No shortage. That's a slippery term. I wonder how that might be determined?
Are we talking about no shortage based on current levels of demand?
Or are we talking about no shortage even though demand could be increasing exponentially?
No shortage almost seems equivalent to claiming the supply is infinite. Is oil infinite in supply? For that to be true it would conceivably require it to be constantly created out of nothing. Is oil constantly being created out of nothing?
No shortages in the ground. It sounds a bit vague. Do you mean there will always be enough high quality easily extracted oil to continuously provide a 20th century energy rich lifestyle to all, including those in countries which heretofore have not become industrialized?
The assertion that there were no dinosaurs is probably one that geologists and paleontologists would disagree with you on. Although it's irrelevant to oil, since the dinosaurs didn't contribute to oil formation, and they also died out too far in the past.
No fossil fuels. Could be. But that is in accord with the attitude of the deep state: they are constantly, of late, trying to suppress knowledge and discussion of energy issues. They deny the problem exists. They float alternative theories regarding the origin of oil. They tout global warming (to scare people enough so they might go along with restrictions on travel). They promote the development (or the belief in) alternative energy sources which will make everything all better now mommy. The suspicion then is that they don't want too many people to become aware of the subject and form independent plans of action. They'd rather just wipe out 80 or 90 percent of us unaposed.
I don't doubt any of those narratives or beliefs. I'm just pointing at the dynamic they create: confusion, not cohesion. Pieces of truth buried in so many different narratives — extremely difficult for any one mind to put together.
Thanks. You're right that willingness to be wrong is the rarest achievement — I've been fooled plenty of times, and I'll be fooled again. The goal isn't perfect sight; it's staying humble enough to notice when the map doesn't match the territory. We want quick clarity, but real unravelling happens at a pace our outrage-addicted brains can barely tolerate. Appreciate your saying this.
The question relevant to nuclear energy is what its real EROEI is. All these so-called alternatives (like wind, solar, nuclear) do have a real EROEI; but ascertaining it is a different story. It's disputed. Nuclear energy requires a fully-functional technological society to develop and maintain. But a fully functional technological society is based on plentiful, cheap energy, namely, oil, coal, and natural gas. The apologists for the system wave their arms about how green alternatives can takeover from oil, but for all we know it's wishful thinking and the true EROEI of the alternatives could be close to 1:1 (not viable substitutes).
An underlying issue is whether one believes in the myth of progress. That's a purely metaphysical speculation. And it likely is a subset of Enlightenment Philosophy. So from our standpoint -- that of modern technological society life and its possible future -- does one think Enlightenment Philosophy is true, or at least more true than its competitors (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc.)? It looks true at the moment, but will it survive declining energy input? The financial system won't, that's for sure...unless we obtain a kind of Jubilee.
Yep and the noise is amplified by people who still haven't learned how to look at the big picture.
Sadly, a lot of them that got it during covid are now off the rails.
A common issue is that they claim that we are in the worst position in time but forget that only a few decades ago the majority were ok with apartheid, sexism, racism, etc.
People didn't see the ridiculous inflation in real estate until recently. I was screaming about it 2 decades ago but many were still asleep, believing in the market blindly instead of using their senses.
The big picture is that humanity is more aware of corruption now and this might be why social media, etc ramped up the distractions to keep people from getting a correct gist of the situation.
For example, this Iran war is severely hyped. We hear all the actions and how the strait of Hormuz is messed up right now. However, it seems like reality is not confirming this.
I used a simple barometer, gas prices are around $5 and compared that to Bush Jr's Iraq war when gas was up to around the same price but adjusting with inflation would be almost $8 today.
What gives here? They say the Iran war is the biggest yet in the middle east, yet the Iraq war which didn't block the strait had higher prices... Hmm
BTW, there was an interesting article that you'll enjoy regarding left brain bias and perception. It doesn't mention it but we can see why this happens.
Thanks for this. You're right that past generations had their own blind spots — but it's worse now in that we've lost a shared baseline of reality.
The gas price barometer is sharp. If this Iran crisis were what they claim, prices would be worse than Iraq adjusted for inflation. They aren't. That's worth sitting with, and the article you sent last week showed the theatre of it.
When I started writing this essay, my intent was to expose the Iran war not as a cause of energy crisis, but as a coverup of energy crisis already unfolding. I didn't quite get there (yet). I agree — if it were real, prices would be much worse by now. I've come to understand that narratives drive a much bigger part of controlled demolitions than I first imagined.
Appreciate the Aporia link — Indigenous knowing maps perfectly onto McGilchrist. Will check your Battlestar piece.
Wendy: At your suggestion I started the "Collapse" movie and a few minutes into it realized that any meaningful "pushback" would have to come from reading the Ruppert book. To me--the movie seemed "sensational" from the get-go.
Unfortunately, my library doesn't have the book so I'll limit myself to a "free" read of the sample I can get from Kindle. BUT.... since any reference to "Peak Oil" gets my synapses firing, I decided to "google -around" to see if I could find any "critique" that resonated with me. I did. Here's the link:
There may be more comment to come, but not immediately. I need to re-read and re-think my initial reaction to what I read as the "intra-left-hemisphere" war which I think you're describing as much as what I think you've tried to describe as "inter-hemispheric warfare."
Berman flipped, yes. He now argues the real threat was never absolute physical scarcity (I agree with that part), but economic limits: extraction cost, EROI, and debt-driven growth. He says we may face a demand peak from slowing growth and demographics, not a geological cliff.
I’m not buying it—at least not yet.
My eye is on something he barely touches: the relationship between oil production and currency as a debt instrument. At these debt levels, the thing that breaks first won’t be the oil wells. It’ll be the currency.
Energy, not money, is the root of all economic activity. But we’ve inverted that. We designed a system that wastes energy to chase profit, with debt as the accelerant.
Case in point: the Azores. They ship beef somewhere else, only to buy it cheaper from yet somewhere else. That’s not trade. That’s energy arbitrage dressed up as efficiency, made possible by dollars held down by debt. We get cheap energy in exchange for devaluing an ever-increasing supply of dollars.
That’s game theory: we export inflation, import real goods, and tell other countries to absorb the fallout. The traders profit. The rest of the world holds the bag.
Nature says that ain’t gonna be allowed to continue.
😊👍….More later, but until then: do you think Colonel Drake could have even “fantasized” today’s petroleum industry or ways in which the world’s energy needs may be met “post-carbon”?
Great question. I doubt Colonel Drake could have imagined today's petroleum industry. He was chasing kerosene for lamps. The idea that his single well would lead to supertankers, fracking, global supply chains, and 100 million barrels a day? Fantasy. And that's exactly the point: each generation underestimates how deeply hooked we've become. Look at how many people think we're The Jetsons, linear progress forever, despite nature's hint about cycles and its warning with The St. Matthew Island story. Drake couldn't see us. And we can't see past us. What will the next generation see that we can't?
I'm surrounded by the "next generation +!" in the form of grandchildren who "see" things I either refuse to believe exist, or if I stretch, see distortions where they think they "can see clearly now, the rain is gone"
It’s been a while since I read it, but the book is really good. It’s been a long time since I mentioned his name as well. I’ll take a look at the link that you sent above tomorrow or Tuesday with fresh eyes.
Apologies but I can’t attach an image here so you’ll have to actually go to the link if you want to see it. The first sentences, of course brilliant. Simplicity is his ultimate sophistication….
“Energy, not money, is the root of all economic activity. Money represents only the ability to do work. By itself, a dollar bill can do nothing. You cannot put it in your gas tank and expect your car to run. Energy is that which money symbolizes, whether it is the slave labor of centuries past, which built civilizations that later perished, the food that comes to your table today, or the gasoline that goes into your car or the electricity that comes into your home. Cheap energy has always been the equivalent of free slave labor for industrial civilization…. There is one other essential difference between money and energy. Money can grow infinitely. Energy, i.e. the slaves necessary to give money value, cannot.”
- Microchips under your skin – 24/7 tracking, eventually to “cull” the population.
The sell and slow walk illustrates positive applications like early Dx of serious medical conditions or finding a missing child etc
- Free energy suppressed by oil oligarchs for a century.
Photos of world wide cathedrals, monoliths, pyramids etc, supposedly build by dudes with donkey carts and chisels of less... Tartaria, huge copper grounding wires, domes or spires that have been removed or replaced or destroyed
- 5G towers controlling your thoughts.
The myriad of health destroying effects of 5 G were not news a decade ago...
- COVID vaccines designed to slowly kill you.
Not slow for many. 30 million dead, a much larger # disabled, myocarditis is children.
A new term by oncologists "turbo cancer" to explain the inexplicable
mRNA tech by definition are not vaccines they are gene altering tech
- Chemtrails – government spraying toxins from planes.
first it was denied, then rebranded, now justified. Undeniable for anyone who looks up.
- Weather manipulation – governments creating hurricanes and earthquakes.
Hundreds of vids of world wide flooding and "wild" fires
- The moon landing was staged.
That one is laughable. Green screens, no footage, only computer generated images
NASA training pools, flies on the shuttle when zoomed in, The Artemis circling the moon fantasy is an intelligence test
- The Earth is flat, guarded by NASA ice walls.
If one can solve a square root equation the shape can be verified or not.
- The “Great Reset” – elites collapsing the economy for total control.
- QAnon – a satanic pedophile cabal runs the world.
The hundreds of arrests of child trafficing are ongoing all the way to the top of the tree
- FEMA camps – disaster relief as political imprisonment.
The camps most definitely exist
- Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Peter Thiel are not human.
who knows, but broad brushing Better to look for evidence of what each currently supports
- Brigitte Macron was born male.
Anyone with eyes knows the simple truth
- Israel was behind 9/11.
What entity accomplished it? Most definitely not a handful of dudes with box cutters
- Harvard is a Mossad base.
Head of chemistry at Harvard was arrested with 2 Chinese nationals having vials of Bioweapons attempting a flight from the US to China...
- Charlie Kirk’s assassination was a federal conspiracy involving foreign governments.
We were lied to, that much is certain
- COVID vaccines are a depopulation tool.
they mRNA shots are not vaccines and they have depopulated
- Secret U.S. biolabs operate in Ukraine.
Very likely that Russia destroyed most with surgical strikes at the beginning of that war
- Public figures are secretly transgender.
open your eyes peeps, know your anatomy, women do not have adams apples, have different shaped pelvis, shoulders, facial features. Anyone who has been to Thailand and witnessed the ladyboy phenom knows there are really good fakes... So
I'm sure there's truth in all the narratives, to some extent, and plenty to lead people astray as well. The list could be extended to hundreds, maybe thousands. But I don't focus on the narratives. What does it matter if what Nate says is true? That fact will change everything anyway. Better to figure out how to navigate the transition than focus on whether these narratives are true or not. It's like arguing how to arrange the furniture on the Titanic. Better to focus on how to get off before it sinks.
Decades before it became "popular" to choose sides in the "mis/dis-information" culture war, this happened (according to one source, Barbara Honegger);
Disinformation Central Intelligence Agency Politics
_______________________________
Did CIA Director William Casey really say, "We'll
know our disinformation program is complete
when everything the American public believes is
false"?
Barbara Honegger, studied at Stanford University
Answered Nov 25 2014
I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William
Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan
with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about
their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration.
The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House,
not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the
chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he
had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’
that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like
newspapers and magazines.
As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan
asked what he saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which
he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting
as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah
McClendon, who was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public.
That is fine Wendy, I do have the certainty, and the list is more than adequate.
Could not disagree more on the change position. Things are changing for the better so fast that if one takes an hour off for a beach walk they are in arears.
It is not re-arranging the deck chairs, it is using the preponderance of evidence over time to make the best possible decision going forward.
Broad brushing is the error of equivalence.
Replacing uncertainty with relative or even absolute certainty if preferable to jumping in a life raft.
Just spent an hour in the sun, feeding neighbor doggies treats, then tending to organic gardern, to balance the doomsplaying. Called a half dozen moms and grandmoms to acknowledge them on this day.
Wrote an email to siblings remembering my own mother of 8, etc etc
Sitting down to a bowl of homemade coconut yogurt with home grown 'nana and organic raspberries. Very grateful...
Can’t say I disagree. I can say I’m tired. I’ve been running around all over this Mother’s Day. And I was supposed to have a day off. ;) Happy Mothers Day! It all matters, yes, and it’s all noisy too. I just need a nap. :)😴
Wendy, something I recently read puts a fine point on your very profound message today.
"Remember that however you are played, or by whom, your soul is in your keeping alone.
Even though those who presume to play you claim to be kings or men of power, when you
stand before God, you cannot say "I was told by others to do thus," or that "virtue was not
convenient at the time." This will not suffice. The incessant messaging to continue mass mind control is fast approaching the final reveal exposed in the Wizard of Oz. Your wise council
offers a solution no matter which tribe we belong to.
Thank you for this, Barbara — especially the line about standing before God. That cuts through everything. You said it for me, and I appreciate it.
You're right: the Wizard of Oz moment is coming (or maybe it's already here). The curtain gets pulled back, and the bluster is exposed as just that — bluster. What's left is each of us, accountable for our own choices, unable to blame the "men behind the curtains." Sobering. And right. As Jesus said, first remove the plank from your own eye.
I wrote this essay because I believe we still have that choice — not easy, but real. Your words remind me that the solution isn't just seeing the system clearly, but what we do with that sight. Thank you, as always, for reading so deeply and responding with calm, thoughtful wisdom.
Thank you Wendy, I was remiss in not first extending to you wishes for a very Happy Mother's Day, Hope you are having a particularly lovely one surrounded by those who love you.
Thank you, Barbara. Happy Mother’s Day to you too. It’s an ordinary day this year but the boys made me breakfast, which I appreciated. :) Hope your day was full of love.
Good think piece but I would add religions to that list for historically obvious reasons. Furthermore, to be clear,I would leave "Spirituality" OFF that list, unless it morphs into a religion.
Thanks for this. You're right that refusing to look is its own loop — just quieter. And I love the beach example. Picking up trash doesn't solve the whole system, but it's real action in a world of noise. Occam's razor cuts both ways: the simplest explanation for our predicament is energy, not evil. But evil? It exists. And it knows exactly how to use complacency.
Thanks for daring to broach this topic, it is unavoidable.
Also difficult to discuss without descending into the very binary illustrated.
When reviewing the laundry list of "topics" , as many have, there is another option.
Taken one at a time it is fully possible to use didactic reasoning skills and information
from many sources to confirm or deny the evidence. The middle ground is "maybe". Dramatic claims require dramatic evidence, It exists for the seeker with the bandwidth to remain objective.
Once a topic has been thoroghly evaluated over time, it is possible to file it.
Some have created a "We have been lied to file folder" with sub folders.
That begs the question why and by whom in each instance. That explains much but does not solve the crisis nor the polarity.
It is more that possible to unpack the comprehensive list published, or even to pick the top contenders. A conspiracy is when two or more plot to do something illegal, it fits for many on the list. A theory in science is testable, called a hypothesis, and can be falsified.
The threshold humankind faces is the widespread idea that AI can in seconds solve any problem. That is not wise and destroys the very fabric of the tribes you mention.
(Tested GROK for the first and only time yesterday with a detailed scientific querry)
One of the concerns on you list that is neither a conspiracy nor theoretical)
Took the "engine" 7 secs to provide a detailed response obfuscating and glossing over the issue.
It cited Reuters and Wiki as sources. Absolutely sophomoric but impressive...
Thank you for this — especially the reminder that "maybe" is a legitimate option. The binary is the trap, and you're right that AI just regurgitates the noise unless we bring our own discernment. Your GROK test is telling. And might I ask, what does AI rely on? Cheap energy. I love Nate's term "Energy Blind" as it's really so true.
Hi Wendy. I really appreciate this piece, especially "When you cannot tell what is real, your brain cannot tell what is safe." Consequently, I have been putting my hands and feet directly on the earth much more later because I know the earth is real.
I have been harping on EROEI since I learned about Peak Oil 20 years ago and I really appreciate Nate Hagens' work.
I have a new mantra right now: Is what I am about to do going to create more connection or disconnection with myself and the people who matter to me? TPTB have weaponized disconnection to the point of societal fragmentation. We can take that back one interaction at a time.
The "look over there" distractions — wars, culture battles, outrage stories — don't change the physics. Debt can suppress the price of energy for a while, but supply and demand always settle the score. You can't distract or print your way out of thermodynamics.
What is now being dramatized all over the planet is the Western Wetiko Psychosis which was first described by Jack Forbes in his book Columbus & Other Cannibals.
And further described by Paul Levy in his three books on the topic which are introduced here:
I've never heard of this before… Are you saying that the destructive patterns playing out in the world today are symptoms of a kind of spiritual 'mind-virus' called Wetiko? And that to be 'wetiko' means having a sickness of consuming other life-forms' vitality to fuel one's own diseased way of living?
I'll admit, I'm having a hard time connecting my usual understanding of a 'virus' to that idea. But I do resonate strongly with the notion of a pathological self-centering 'mind' where the ego mistakes itself for the whole of reality. I've called this 'left-brain dominance' myself, and I'm on board with Iain McGilchrist's framework. For me, that framing is easier to hold than a virus.
Jesus — regardless of who people say he was, taught humanity how to submit the left brain to the right brain, and how to return to the proper divine hierarchy with an evolved self-consciousness. Not a drug, not an antiviral, a way thinking and being. I like the simplicity of that which I think (correct me if I'm wrong) is the main idea.
Thank you, Wendy. As someone who tries to get things done and/or changed and/or just left the Hell alone in my small city, the single biggest hurdle for me is getting people to let go of their polarities. Let’s say there’s trash on the beach that should be picked up but isn’t. Just get a group of people equally fed up with the unsanitary beach and do it. It doesn’t matter what they did last week, or who they voted for or whether they eat meat. All that matters is doing it. And that is why our small cities and towns are falling apart and becoming unlivable. Because the people at the top are geniuses at polarizing people into meaningless factions so that nothing gets done to just make life a little better today.
Polly, you’ve got the right attitude. The beach doesn't care about the culture war. Neither does a pothole, a broken streetlight, or a kid who needs a mentor. But the system works overtime to make sure we care about everything except the thing right in front of us. That's not an accident. And you're right: the only way out is to stop asking "which side are you on?" and start asking "can you help me pick up this trash?" Appreciate you.
Hi Wendy. Thank you for another thought-provoking essay. I agree completely that the great faultline of our civilization is that the hydrocarbons running the show are becoming more difficult to extract and therefore more expensive, and cannot sustain the built-in requirement for growth the global economy demands. (Another way to look at it would be more and more energy goes toward obtaining more energy, whether that be building a massive concrete pad for a windmill or fracking tight oil from a well in the Permian basin, rather than toward building and maintaining infrastructure, producing consumer goods, etc.-- ie. growing the GDP. )
But is hiding that fact really the reason behind all the noise, the tactical deployment of “ambiguity increasing” as a weapon in the information war?
Nate Hagens is just the latest in a line of writers and researchers attempting to bring the oil situation to the forefront.I’ve been following the oil “situation” for over 20 years now (yikes), first through environmental concerns, then by following writers like John Michael Greer and Nicole Foss and Gail Tvorberg who emerged from the peak oil movement.
By the time I took a bus down to Washington, D.C. to get arrested in the 2012 XL pipeline protests, I was already feeling a lot of congnitive dissonance based on my understanding of EROEI and it’s relationship to the financial system, as well as Foss’ statement that "Any civilization that can produce solar panels can't be run on them." which encapsulates concepts like system complexity and embodied energy. So even while being handcuffed and shoved into the back of a police van, I could see the (unavoidable) hypocrisy of 350.org and similar environmental alarmist groups.
In the years that followed, I started to question the fundemental mythologies and histories of our world, so that, in 2020, I was ready for the covid op and subsequent lockdowns. No shot for me, thankyouverymuch. Any remaining doubts about questioning every single thing went completely away.
Which is to say, the facts about oil depletion, EROEI, collapse of complex systems, etc. have been out there for a long time–M. King Hubbert published his peak oil “theory” in 1956. (I put theory in quotes because oil being finite and therefore subject to a peak is a fact, not a theory. The theory part I suppose is speculating when that peak would occur. More on this in a moment.) Yet this is not common knowledge, as you rightly point out.
But is it really because of the increasing amount of conspiracy theories and binary arguments flooding the digital waves? Or is it maybe something else? Or a combination?
I suspect the biggest impediment to a wider understanding of the role oil plays in the fragile nature of our status quo is our complete faith as a society in the Myth of Perpetual Progress. (This is perfectly illustrated in this context by a line from the Wikipedia entry on Hubbert’s peak oil theory:
“The development of new technologies has provided access to large quantities of unconventional resources, and the boost in production has largely discounted Hubbert's prediction “ The entry also mentions BOE–Barrel of Oil Equivalent–which covers solar, wind, nuclear, etc., which I would say qualifies as ambiguity increasing.)
There is a certain, rather small segment of the population that apparently has the ability to dismantle this myth. Whether that has to do with some childhood trauma, a genetic disposition toward skepticism, or who knows, but it is not necessarily simply book learning; that will fail without the reception activated.
I have a number of intelligent friends who, for example, thought fracking was only about natural gas, and insist that solar and wind or nuclear fusion or some as yet undetermined energy source (talk about magical thinking!) will come along soon. So I don’t think all the ambiguity is generated for that main reason. But of course all the confusion helps with the achievement of many other goals desired by the PWB (People Who Benefit). You could look at it in relation to the shock doctrine and disaster capitalism
You say we should ask “Who benefits?” My question would then be, How, and Why? Is it just to gain more power and money? Is it to ultimately set in motion a massive die-off, so there will be more resources and many fewer humans? Certainly if the standoff in the Strait of Hormuz continues we will likely see mass starvation in many parts of the world.
Finally, in one of your comment replies you write:
“Better to figure out how to navigate the transition than focus on whether these narratives are true or not. It's like arguing how to arrange the furniture on the Titanic. Better to focus on how to get off before it sinks.”
Early on, I was studying permaculture, wondering about moving to a more rural area and homesteading, learning how to shoot, etc. Now I realize, I am in this particular time, and there is no jumping ship. The thing to do is to befriend the passengers next to you, and enjoy the band.
(By the way, spooky AI illustration! Looks like data centers are poised to be the next ambiguity increasing.)
I had to stop reading at “oil being finite”. Do you mean to tell me i can't have abiotic oil? Are you saying the precious planet isn't filled with a creamy crude nougat center? Im going to have to go for a drive in my F250 and think, then post a rant.
Smiling.
And actually the data center issue raises another puzzle in your theory. The same people responsible for the AI/data center issue are the ones who are trying to hide the oil situation. They must then understand our natural gas and coal will not support all these planned centers. Sometimes I wonder if the PWB are actually NitWits.
Hi Mark, long time no hear. Nice to see your wisdom here again. You've clearly been on this road much longer than I have, and I appreciate you sharing your journey. The fact that you got arrested at the XL pipeline protests while already doubting the environmentalist framing speaks volumes. It's humbling and rewarding as a writer to have intelligent, experienced people engaging with what I write.
You raise a fair point: is the oil/finance fragility really the reason behind all the noise, or is the Myth of Perpetual Progress the bigger impediment? I think both. The myth makes us receptive to the noise — we want to believe something will save us, so we grasp at competing narratives (solar, fusion, free energy, whatever). The "free energy" narrative, for example, serves the same function as any other: it keeps people dancing in circles while the shearing continues.
Your question about the PWB being nitwits made me laugh. But I don't buy it. Central Intelligence is not Central Stupidity. As Lara Logan said, the NSA is the crown jewel of intelligence collection — they don't "miss" things. So when I see chaos, I don't see incompetence. I see an act. The full wits aren't visible actors; they hire the actors. They know exactly what they're doing. They are masters of manipulation and mind control — and we have the factual history to prove it: Operation Mockingbird, MKUltra, COINTELPRO, and more.
The more important question, to me, is why so many people let the system study them so intently — to the point that it knows more about you than you know about yourself — and still trust the performance. And what are the movie makers hiding behind specific narratives like "free energy"? What is that particular plant designed to deflect? (I'd say: the real limits of EROI and the debt-energy trap.) And if that virus and those vaccines were engineered, then what for? Maybe to manage the crisis that's coming with energy? When you lay out all these narratives on a table and you identify how each one is diverting attention...it's clear. At least to me.
So I'm always looking behind the curtain. Thanks again for pushing me to think harder.
With all the narratives on the table, you can begin to piece together a mastermind plan to deal with that crisis. If you were the mastermind, and you saw an energy cliff coming, you might conclude there shouldn't be so many people on Earth consuming so much. It's ironic that AI consumes enormous energy — it's accelerating the collapse. Maybe that's also controlled demolition toward their plan. Or maybe it's part of dumbing people down and distracting them. But they definitely have a plan. Central intelligence is not stupid. I don't have it all figured out, but I have a general idea.
Regarding free energy, that one has a long history as well--back in the 1950s, aka the atomic age, the head guy at the atomic agency promised nuclear energy would be too cheap to meter.
No doubt there are enough evil geniuses among the nitwits to create havoc. But let us not forget the immortal words of Robert Burns: "The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men / Often go awry"
Which is funny, because I am (sort of) trying to write a post of my own on substack, with the tentative title, My Theory Is, It's All A Conspiracy, with the tagline:
Row, row, row your boat gently down the stream;
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a scheme!
Wendy, I look forward to your publications, you make me think about things through a different lens than those I am typically using. This one, however, seems a bit doomer-ish with respect to the sense of urgency. I watched each of Nate’s videos, very likely directionally accurate but perhaps 100-200 years premature. If forced to bet, I would take the over, 200+. I agree the bulk of societies everywhere resemble the young fish in David Foster Wallace’s beautiful 2005 commencement address “This is Water”. There is a shockingly low appreciation for how the world works (energy is life) and so much entitlement among the resource rich. But we are extraordinary at innovation and procrastination, such that I think it will be a very long time before we truly face a shortage of affordable energy. The definition of affordable may evolve but I would not bet on a near term shortage of the natural resources - supply chains may become disrupted, but not the ability to access the resources below ground.
I think the twist is in the relationship between debt and energy. They do not operate independently. So let's see how it goes. I'm not as hopeful as you are, but I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong. I hope I am. Truly.
I do pride myself on challenging intelligent people to think differently. 😉 If I can do just that — without changing anyone's beliefs — then I think I've succeeded in my mission as a writer.
Thank you for being here. I appreciate your thoughtful comment.
I'm struck by your equation that "energy"="carbon-based energy". That false equation was "pushed" by those who were tagged "greenies", the "low-wits" for the carbon-based economy. That economy feared the real financial/political challenge--but I repeat--of atomic energy. You nailed the importance of "energy"; you missed the nail and hit your thumb by focusing on the "story" that "energy"="carbon-based energy."
Hi Derek. Thanks for the sharp critique. You're right that I defaulted to "energy = carbon" — and that's worth examining. I'm not an expert, but rather reporting on what I've come to understand from people like Steve St. Angelo, Nate Hagens, etc. They've convinced me.
Nate Hagens (whose videos I recommended) directly addresses your point. He argues that energy quality matters as much as quantity. Oil is liquid, energy-dense, portable, and storable. Nuclear delivers constant high power, but it's difficult to ramp up/down, capital-intensive, and requires grid infrastructure that itself depends on fossil inputs. More importantly, our entire mining, shipping, rail, trucking, and personal transport system runs on oil's unique properties — not just kilowatt hours.
Hagens also notes that alternative energy tech (including nuclear) is "rebuildable, not renewable" — it requires massive material and energy inputs every 20-30 years. And we've never in history fully transitioned off an energy source; we just add layers (Jevons paradox).
So the question, I think, isn't whether nuclear could play a role. It's whether it can replace oil's systemic function at scale and speed, at the pace EROI is shrinking. Hagens says no. And our wars suggest the same.
Watch his Energy 201 and 301 videos. He walks through all of this without the carbon-only assumption. I'd be curious if you still think I missed the nail after watching. If you do, let me know exactly where. Nonetheless, I appreciate the pushback. It's good for me — and for readers. Again, I'm not an expert on energy. Just trying to see the big picture, trusting others who have made the most compelling arguments to me.
Appreciate the push. We are all trying to build a complete picture from puzzle pieces. Another influential figure in my thinking, now gone, is Michael Ruppert, author of Confronting Collapse: The Crisis of Energy and Money in a Post Peak Oil World — and this film: https://youtu.be/eLLl5NOLdwA?si=cd6Zzjk28vMUUoj0
It is Mother's Day and all
Regarding energy: Oil is not a fossil fuel from the perspective of scarcity, and is renewable. There is no shortage and never has been. That disclosed it is horribly polluting, oil spills and fires are the consequences, for which there is no viable solution.
Nuclear Powerplants produce an abundance of energy, are relatively contained,
and new techonolgy a tiny fraction of the previous size. They produce spent fuel rods with half lives of radioactive isotopes that are lethal if uncontained for thousand of years. Scatter bombs with radioactive isotopes very likely explain what occured in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
The promise of free energy from the "ethers" / non polluting, infinite, solves most of humanity's problems, instantly. If I had to wager has been discovered and harnessed a very very long time ago. Dramatic claims do require dramatic evidence.
It exists.
There sure are plenty of narratives around oil. Free energy? I do think this is constructed narrative, as tempting as it is to believe. It serves the good-evil narrative structure — and that's what I forgot to include — narratives that reduce to good and evil are usually constructed to play people. Isn't it interesting, dating back to that tree: knowledge of good and evil? Such a trickster that tree.
realize binary thinking is prevalent
the snake in that tree was the trickster
Wendy, FE can be proven by personal observations. Moon landings were an obvious hoax.
There is no shortage of oil or coal. But there is currently an interruption in transportation.
No shortage. That's a slippery term. I wonder how that might be determined?
Are we talking about no shortage based on current levels of demand?
Or are we talking about no shortage even though demand could be increasing exponentially?
No shortage almost seems equivalent to claiming the supply is infinite. Is oil infinite in supply? For that to be true it would conceivably require it to be constantly created out of nothing. Is oil constantly being created out of nothing?
No shortages in the ground. There were no dinosaurs, no fossil fuels.
No shortages in the ground. It sounds a bit vague. Do you mean there will always be enough high quality easily extracted oil to continuously provide a 20th century energy rich lifestyle to all, including those in countries which heretofore have not become industrialized?
The assertion that there were no dinosaurs is probably one that geologists and paleontologists would disagree with you on. Although it's irrelevant to oil, since the dinosaurs didn't contribute to oil formation, and they also died out too far in the past.
No fossil fuels. Could be. But that is in accord with the attitude of the deep state: they are constantly, of late, trying to suppress knowledge and discussion of energy issues. They deny the problem exists. They float alternative theories regarding the origin of oil. They tout global warming (to scare people enough so they might go along with restrictions on travel). They promote the development (or the belief in) alternative energy sources which will make everything all better now mommy. The suspicion then is that they don't want too many people to become aware of the subject and form independent plans of action. They'd rather just wipe out 80 or 90 percent of us unaposed.
As it turns out they drill for oil deeper than fossils have been found. Geologists know this fact. You believe the propaganda.
Oil and gas are abundant and we won't run out as long as the supply chains continue to function.
Fresh water on the other hand is in short supply. AI data centers are competing with humans for water.
https://youtu.be/H3ZXBl-tXR0?si=Zs_vdBjUr5c6L3Xr
No, I am saying the “shortages” are man made.
I don't doubt any of those narratives or beliefs. I'm just pointing at the dynamic they create: confusion, not cohesion. Pieces of truth buried in so many different narratives — extremely difficult for any one mind to put together.
I disagree. I don't accept that our minds can't sort it out given enough information. What is needed is the motivation to seek truth.
I’m just tired. May the truth prevail. I’ll let you figure it out. ;)
Truth is discoverable. But the search for truth never ends.
Thanks. I will watch. And then pushback(insert smile emoji)
Please do! I like challenges. :) And I'm okay being wrong too. ;)
After spending thousand of hours unpacking false beliefs,
admission is a pre-requisite for all. Your well conceived list of
~ 20 prominent explanations for "crazy" is very accurate to explain the divide. The solutions? Slow walking reveals has been chosen.
World Views on the chopping blocks.
Very few have arrived at the willingness to be wrong achievement.
All of us have been fooled...
Thanks. You're right that willingness to be wrong is the rarest achievement — I've been fooled plenty of times, and I'll be fooled again. The goal isn't perfect sight; it's staying humble enough to notice when the map doesn't match the territory. We want quick clarity, but real unravelling happens at a pace our outrage-addicted brains can barely tolerate. Appreciate your saying this.
anyone who cannot do a personal life review to REAL EYES they were mislead and thus fooled remains and calcifies, literally
And I appreciate you itemizing the divides even if a remedy is elusive
The question relevant to nuclear energy is what its real EROEI is. All these so-called alternatives (like wind, solar, nuclear) do have a real EROEI; but ascertaining it is a different story. It's disputed. Nuclear energy requires a fully-functional technological society to develop and maintain. But a fully functional technological society is based on plentiful, cheap energy, namely, oil, coal, and natural gas. The apologists for the system wave their arms about how green alternatives can takeover from oil, but for all we know it's wishful thinking and the true EROEI of the alternatives could be close to 1:1 (not viable substitutes).
An underlying issue is whether one believes in the myth of progress. That's a purely metaphysical speculation. And it likely is a subset of Enlightenment Philosophy. So from our standpoint -- that of modern technological society life and its possible future -- does one think Enlightenment Philosophy is true, or at least more true than its competitors (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc.)? It looks true at the moment, but will it survive declining energy input? The financial system won't, that's for sure...unless we obtain a kind of Jubilee.
Yep and the noise is amplified by people who still haven't learned how to look at the big picture.
Sadly, a lot of them that got it during covid are now off the rails.
A common issue is that they claim that we are in the worst position in time but forget that only a few decades ago the majority were ok with apartheid, sexism, racism, etc.
People didn't see the ridiculous inflation in real estate until recently. I was screaming about it 2 decades ago but many were still asleep, believing in the market blindly instead of using their senses.
The big picture is that humanity is more aware of corruption now and this might be why social media, etc ramped up the distractions to keep people from getting a correct gist of the situation.
For example, this Iran war is severely hyped. We hear all the actions and how the strait of Hormuz is messed up right now. However, it seems like reality is not confirming this.
I used a simple barometer, gas prices are around $5 and compared that to Bush Jr's Iraq war when gas was up to around the same price but adjusting with inflation would be almost $8 today.
What gives here? They say the Iran war is the biggest yet in the middle east, yet the Iraq war which didn't block the strait had higher prices... Hmm
BTW, there was an interesting article that you'll enjoy regarding left brain bias and perception. It doesn't mention it but we can see why this happens.
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-case-for-indigenous-ways-of-knowing
I replied mentioning McGilchrist's books and my article on the difference observed in a sci-fi show.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/left-brain-vs-whole-brain-in-battlestar
Thanks for this. You're right that past generations had their own blind spots — but it's worse now in that we've lost a shared baseline of reality.
The gas price barometer is sharp. If this Iran crisis were what they claim, prices would be worse than Iraq adjusted for inflation. They aren't. That's worth sitting with, and the article you sent last week showed the theatre of it.
When I started writing this essay, my intent was to expose the Iran war not as a cause of energy crisis, but as a coverup of energy crisis already unfolding. I didn't quite get there (yet). I agree — if it were real, prices would be much worse by now. I've come to understand that narratives drive a much bigger part of controlled demolitions than I first imagined.
Appreciate the Aporia link — Indigenous knowing maps perfectly onto McGilchrist. Will check your Battlestar piece.
Wendy: At your suggestion I started the "Collapse" movie and a few minutes into it realized that any meaningful "pushback" would have to come from reading the Ruppert book. To me--the movie seemed "sensational" from the get-go.
Unfortunately, my library doesn't have the book so I'll limit myself to a "free" read of the sample I can get from Kindle. BUT.... since any reference to "Peak Oil" gets my synapses firing, I decided to "google -around" to see if I could find any "critique" that resonated with me. I did. Here's the link:
https://www.artberman.com/blog/peak-oil-requiem-for-a-failed-paradigm/
There may be more comment to come, but not immediately. I need to re-read and re-think my initial reaction to what I read as the "intra-left-hemisphere" war which I think you're describing as much as what I think you've tried to describe as "inter-hemispheric warfare."
Ok, fresh eyes and coffee this AM.
Berman flipped, yes. He now argues the real threat was never absolute physical scarcity (I agree with that part), but economic limits: extraction cost, EROI, and debt-driven growth. He says we may face a demand peak from slowing growth and demographics, not a geological cliff.
I’m not buying it—at least not yet.
My eye is on something he barely touches: the relationship between oil production and currency as a debt instrument. At these debt levels, the thing that breaks first won’t be the oil wells. It’ll be the currency.
Energy, not money, is the root of all economic activity. But we’ve inverted that. We designed a system that wastes energy to chase profit, with debt as the accelerant.
Case in point: the Azores. They ship beef somewhere else, only to buy it cheaper from yet somewhere else. That’s not trade. That’s energy arbitrage dressed up as efficiency, made possible by dollars held down by debt. We get cheap energy in exchange for devaluing an ever-increasing supply of dollars.
That’s game theory: we export inflation, import real goods, and tell other countries to absorb the fallout. The traders profit. The rest of the world holds the bag.
Nature says that ain’t gonna be allowed to continue.
😊👍….More later, but until then: do you think Colonel Drake could have even “fantasized” today’s petroleum industry or ways in which the world’s energy needs may be met “post-carbon”?
Great question. I doubt Colonel Drake could have imagined today's petroleum industry. He was chasing kerosene for lamps. The idea that his single well would lead to supertankers, fracking, global supply chains, and 100 million barrels a day? Fantasy. And that's exactly the point: each generation underestimates how deeply hooked we've become. Look at how many people think we're The Jetsons, linear progress forever, despite nature's hint about cycles and its warning with The St. Matthew Island story. Drake couldn't see us. And we can't see past us. What will the next generation see that we can't?
I'm surrounded by the "next generation +!" in the form of grandchildren who "see" things I either refuse to believe exist, or if I stretch, see distortions where they think they "can see clearly now, the rain is gone"
It’s been a while since I read it, but the book is really good. It’s been a long time since I mentioned his name as well. I’ll take a look at the link that you sent above tomorrow or Tuesday with fresh eyes.
I think I’ve mentioned him in six of my essays. And this one in particular has a little clip from his book: https://www.wendywilliamson.com/collateral-is-not-debt/
Apologies but I can’t attach an image here so you’ll have to actually go to the link if you want to see it. The first sentences, of course brilliant. Simplicity is his ultimate sophistication….
“Energy, not money, is the root of all economic activity. Money represents only the ability to do work. By itself, a dollar bill can do nothing. You cannot put it in your gas tank and expect your car to run. Energy is that which money symbolizes, whether it is the slave labor of centuries past, which built civilizations that later perished, the food that comes to your table today, or the gasoline that goes into your car or the electricity that comes into your home. Cheap energy has always been the equivalent of free slave labor for industrial civilization…. There is one other essential difference between money and energy. Money can grow infinitely. Energy, i.e. the slaves necessary to give money value, cannot.”
- Microchips under your skin – 24/7 tracking, eventually to “cull” the population.
The sell and slow walk illustrates positive applications like early Dx of serious medical conditions or finding a missing child etc
- Free energy suppressed by oil oligarchs for a century.
Photos of world wide cathedrals, monoliths, pyramids etc, supposedly build by dudes with donkey carts and chisels of less... Tartaria, huge copper grounding wires, domes or spires that have been removed or replaced or destroyed
- 5G towers controlling your thoughts.
The myriad of health destroying effects of 5 G were not news a decade ago...
- COVID vaccines designed to slowly kill you.
Not slow for many. 30 million dead, a much larger # disabled, myocarditis is children.
A new term by oncologists "turbo cancer" to explain the inexplicable
mRNA tech by definition are not vaccines they are gene altering tech
- Chemtrails – government spraying toxins from planes.
first it was denied, then rebranded, now justified. Undeniable for anyone who looks up.
- Weather manipulation – governments creating hurricanes and earthquakes.
Hundreds of vids of world wide flooding and "wild" fires
- The moon landing was staged.
That one is laughable. Green screens, no footage, only computer generated images
NASA training pools, flies on the shuttle when zoomed in, The Artemis circling the moon fantasy is an intelligence test
- The Earth is flat, guarded by NASA ice walls.
If one can solve a square root equation the shape can be verified or not.
- The “Great Reset” – elites collapsing the economy for total control.
- QAnon – a satanic pedophile cabal runs the world.
The hundreds of arrests of child trafficing are ongoing all the way to the top of the tree
- FEMA camps – disaster relief as political imprisonment.
The camps most definitely exist
- Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Peter Thiel are not human.
who knows, but broad brushing Better to look for evidence of what each currently supports
- Brigitte Macron was born male.
Anyone with eyes knows the simple truth
- Israel was behind 9/11.
What entity accomplished it? Most definitely not a handful of dudes with box cutters
- Harvard is a Mossad base.
Head of chemistry at Harvard was arrested with 2 Chinese nationals having vials of Bioweapons attempting a flight from the US to China...
- Charlie Kirk’s assassination was a federal conspiracy involving foreign governments.
We were lied to, that much is certain
- COVID vaccines are a depopulation tool.
they mRNA shots are not vaccines and they have depopulated
- Secret U.S. biolabs operate in Ukraine.
Very likely that Russia destroyed most with surgical strikes at the beginning of that war
- Public figures are secretly transgender.
open your eyes peeps, know your anatomy, women do not have adams apples, have different shaped pelvis, shoulders, facial features. Anyone who has been to Thailand and witnessed the ladyboy phenom knows there are really good fakes... So
I'm sure there's truth in all the narratives, to some extent, and plenty to lead people astray as well. The list could be extended to hundreds, maybe thousands. But I don't focus on the narratives. What does it matter if what Nate says is true? That fact will change everything anyway. Better to figure out how to navigate the transition than focus on whether these narratives are true or not. It's like arguing how to arrange the furniture on the Titanic. Better to focus on how to get off before it sinks.
Decades before it became "popular" to choose sides in the "mis/dis-information" culture war, this happened (according to one source, Barbara Honegger);
Disinformation Central Intelligence Agency Politics
_______________________________
Did CIA Director William Casey really say, "We'll
know our disinformation program is complete
when everything the American public believes is
false"?
Barbara Honegger, studied at Stanford University
Answered Nov 25 2014
I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William
Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan
with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about
their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration.
The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House,
not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the
chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he
had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’
that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like
newspapers and magazines.
As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan
asked what he saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which
he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting
as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah
McClendon, who was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public.
Barbara Honegger bshonegg@gmail.com
That is fine Wendy, I do have the certainty, and the list is more than adequate.
Could not disagree more on the change position. Things are changing for the better so fast that if one takes an hour off for a beach walk they are in arears.
It is not re-arranging the deck chairs, it is using the preponderance of evidence over time to make the best possible decision going forward.
Broad brushing is the error of equivalence.
Replacing uncertainty with relative or even absolute certainty if preferable to jumping in a life raft.
Just spent an hour in the sun, feeding neighbor doggies treats, then tending to organic gardern, to balance the doomsplaying. Called a half dozen moms and grandmoms to acknowledge them on this day.
Wrote an email to siblings remembering my own mother of 8, etc etc
Sitting down to a bowl of homemade coconut yogurt with home grown 'nana and organic raspberries. Very grateful...
Sounds swell.
Can’t say I disagree. I can say I’m tired. I’ve been running around all over this Mother’s Day. And I was supposed to have a day off. ;) Happy Mothers Day! It all matters, yes, and it’s all noisy too. I just need a nap. :)😴
Wendy, something I recently read puts a fine point on your very profound message today.
"Remember that however you are played, or by whom, your soul is in your keeping alone.
Even though those who presume to play you claim to be kings or men of power, when you
stand before God, you cannot say "I was told by others to do thus," or that "virtue was not
convenient at the time." This will not suffice. The incessant messaging to continue mass mind control is fast approaching the final reveal exposed in the Wizard of Oz. Your wise council
offers a solution no matter which tribe we belong to.
Thank you for this, Barbara — especially the line about standing before God. That cuts through everything. You said it for me, and I appreciate it.
You're right: the Wizard of Oz moment is coming (or maybe it's already here). The curtain gets pulled back, and the bluster is exposed as just that — bluster. What's left is each of us, accountable for our own choices, unable to blame the "men behind the curtains." Sobering. And right. As Jesus said, first remove the plank from your own eye.
I wrote this essay because I believe we still have that choice — not easy, but real. Your words remind me that the solution isn't just seeing the system clearly, but what we do with that sight. Thank you, as always, for reading so deeply and responding with calm, thoughtful wisdom.
Thank you Wendy, I was remiss in not first extending to you wishes for a very Happy Mother's Day, Hope you are having a particularly lovely one surrounded by those who love you.
Thank you, Barbara. Happy Mother’s Day to you too. It’s an ordinary day this year but the boys made me breakfast, which I appreciated. :) Hope your day was full of love.
Good think piece but I would add religions to that list for historically obvious reasons. Furthermore, to be clear,I would leave "Spirituality" OFF that list, unless it morphs into a religion.
There are severe consequences unpacking the long list of "concerns" or
of refusing to do so. The later is also a loop, ensuring a type of complacency
that is a default setting for those who simply believe what they are told.
The evil doers know this. They do exist.
Much appreciate the pick up the beach example. Happen to do this personally most days to
keep a beach fairly pristine. Years back there were cleanup days that were organized.
See others doing their part picking up trash someone else discarded.
Every problem has a solution. Occam's Razor in science has stood the test of time suggesting that the simplest explanation is nearly always correct.
As we wander it is appropriate to cultivate reasoning skills and take action using the best available information. That has always been so.
Thanks for this. You're right that refusing to look is its own loop — just quieter. And I love the beach example. Picking up trash doesn't solve the whole system, but it's real action in a world of noise. Occam's razor cuts both ways: the simplest explanation for our predicament is energy, not evil. But evil? It exists. And it knows exactly how to use complacency.
Thanks for daring to broach this topic, it is unavoidable.
Also difficult to discuss without descending into the very binary illustrated.
When reviewing the laundry list of "topics" , as many have, there is another option.
Taken one at a time it is fully possible to use didactic reasoning skills and information
from many sources to confirm or deny the evidence. The middle ground is "maybe". Dramatic claims require dramatic evidence, It exists for the seeker with the bandwidth to remain objective.
Once a topic has been thoroghly evaluated over time, it is possible to file it.
Some have created a "We have been lied to file folder" with sub folders.
That begs the question why and by whom in each instance. That explains much but does not solve the crisis nor the polarity.
It is more that possible to unpack the comprehensive list published, or even to pick the top contenders. A conspiracy is when two or more plot to do something illegal, it fits for many on the list. A theory in science is testable, called a hypothesis, and can be falsified.
The threshold humankind faces is the widespread idea that AI can in seconds solve any problem. That is not wise and destroys the very fabric of the tribes you mention.
(Tested GROK for the first and only time yesterday with a detailed scientific querry)
One of the concerns on you list that is neither a conspiracy nor theoretical)
Took the "engine" 7 secs to provide a detailed response obfuscating and glossing over the issue.
It cited Reuters and Wiki as sources. Absolutely sophomoric but impressive...
Thank you for this — especially the reminder that "maybe" is a legitimate option. The binary is the trap, and you're right that AI just regurgitates the noise unless we bring our own discernment. Your GROK test is telling. And might I ask, what does AI rely on? Cheap energy. I love Nate's term "Energy Blind" as it's really so true.
Hi Wendy. I really appreciate this piece, especially "When you cannot tell what is real, your brain cannot tell what is safe." Consequently, I have been putting my hands and feet directly on the earth much more later because I know the earth is real.
I have been harping on EROEI since I learned about Peak Oil 20 years ago and I really appreciate Nate Hagens' work.
I have a new mantra right now: Is what I am about to do going to create more connection or disconnection with myself and the people who matter to me? TPTB have weaponized disconnection to the point of societal fragmentation. We can take that back one interaction at a time.
The "look over there" distractions — wars, culture battles, outrage stories — don't change the physics. Debt can suppress the price of energy for a while, but supply and demand always settle the score. You can't distract or print your way out of thermodynamics.
What is now being dramatized all over the planet is the Western Wetiko Psychosis which was first described by Jack Forbes in his book Columbus & Other Cannibals.
And further described by Paul Levy in his three books on the topic which are introduced here:
http://www.awakeninthedream.com
I've never heard of this before… Are you saying that the destructive patterns playing out in the world today are symptoms of a kind of spiritual 'mind-virus' called Wetiko? And that to be 'wetiko' means having a sickness of consuming other life-forms' vitality to fuel one's own diseased way of living?
I'll admit, I'm having a hard time connecting my usual understanding of a 'virus' to that idea. But I do resonate strongly with the notion of a pathological self-centering 'mind' where the ego mistakes itself for the whole of reality. I've called this 'left-brain dominance' myself, and I'm on board with Iain McGilchrist's framework. For me, that framing is easier to hold than a virus.
Jesus — regardless of who people say he was, taught humanity how to submit the left brain to the right brain, and how to return to the proper divine hierarchy with an evolved self-consciousness. Not a drug, not an antiviral, a way thinking and being. I like the simplicity of that which I think (correct me if I'm wrong) is the main idea.