Nigel Howitt; philosopher, writer, musician and lifestyle design pioneer, discusses a wide range of issues that are either ignored or misrepresented by the mainstream media. This podcast follows the evidence, not public opinion, and aims at discovering truthful information to guide your lifestyle choices. Nigel deconstructs the modern myths of our time by questioning the many bundled up assumptions in each issue he explores.
Ep 159 – Dangerous False Ideas (Part 1)
In the world today we see the proliferation of bad ideas! Ideas that are false because they contain some aspect that is not true, that does not correspond to reality.
I have been researching across a broad range of topics for the past 10 years, and I have found bad ideas in almost every subject I look into: In science, in medicine, in politics, in climatology, in philosophy, and in the thinking of ordinary people.
Bad ideas, or ideas that are false, cannot lead to anything but failure and suffering. So it’s imperative that we identify any false ideas that we believe to be true. We must consider them, evaluate them, judge them, and reject them.
Ideas affecting values and choices
The most dangerous false ideas are not ones that point to events and things, out there in the world, but those that affect our thinking, our values, and our choices. Meaning, the ideas that affect the way we live. These are the fundamental ideas that, if false, lead to many other downstream or subsequent ideas that are also false.
For example, in medicine, the evidence that contradicts the cherished theory of the cause of disease (germ theory) is ignored. Such evidence reveals that the idea is false. Consequently, no one is looking for a theory of disease causation that is not contradicted by the facts of reality – i.e., the one that is true, because the question has already been answered – if falsely. Remember, all consequent actions based on a falsely identified cause, will, a) not work, and b) cause suffering. (And this is what we see in medicine and health care systems across the world.) The same principle holds for all the bad ideas out there in every field of study. In other words, this is a widespread cultural problem extending across the board. When you uncover something false in the mainstream narrative, it is not an unfortunate isolated incidence. The root problem is systemic!
My purpose in this podcast is to share with you some of the most fundamental false ideas I have identified, so that you too may consider them, and if you hold them to be true, that you may perhaps reconsider them.
There is one specific category of ideas that should be at the top of your list for questioning. These are all the ideas that pertain to, and reflect, the thinking of men. These are usually of a philosophical nature, because philosophy IS the study of fundamental ideas that effect the way we live. These ideas are not at all obviously false, because they are quite abstract, and removed from the observable facts of daily life.
It is the results of such false and fundamental ideas that manifest in the institutions of men, such as in the realms of politics, economics, science and technology, health care, etc.
Some ideas are very powerful because they motivate us and effect our values. The most obvious example is the recent idea of a pandemic, with a scary disease-causing pathogen sweeping the planet changed the behaviour of billions of people! As opposed to an idea of where to have lunch.
It’s worth noting that We very rarely deal with ideas one at a time. They come packaged together in bundles with some component ideas appearing more obviously than others. These complex ideas must be unpacked. For example, the alleged climate emergency issue implicitly makes human beings the problem. Since human actions, from breathing to all forms of energy use, release CO2. If we accept that human caused carbon dioxide is a problem for the environment, we implicitly accept that human activity is the problem.
Let’s look at a couple of examples, that a lot of people hold to be true.
One – Unconditional Love
This is held up as some kind of wonderful ideal to be aspired to. But what does it mean? It means to love someone for no reasons whatsoever. This means, you should be just as willing to love an evil child molester, as a caring and benevolent parent; You should be just as willing willing...
Ep 158 Settling the Virus Debate – with Dr Kevin Corbett
The pioneering work of Dr Tom Cowan and Dr Andy Kaufman has stimulated debate. However, in order to move the issue forward productively a challenge has been made to the virology community to prove their claims. Given the massive implications riding on this claim it is very reasonable to ask for it to be proven. The freedom of the western world rests on it as does the advancement of the science of medicine into a post germ theory era. The challenge is summarised on a two page document that can be found on the website of Dr Sam Bailey, here. I invite you to read it and share it. This is arguably the most important issue of our time. They are calling for the settling of the virus debate by objective scientific experimentation.
In this Episode of “Living outside the Matrix” I am joined by Dr Kevin Corbett, one of the signatories of the document, to discuss the historical context from the the alleged AIDS epidemic of the 1980s. Kevin Corbett MSc PhD is a health scientist and qualified general nurse who has worked in family planning and sexual health.
Neither Dr Corbett nor his associates are saying that people were not sick during the alleged Coronavirus pandemic. What they are saying is that there is no proof for the existence of any corona virus (or any virus for that matter, including HIV) and there is no proof that any supposed pathogen is the causative agent of any disease.
In the interview Dr Corbett recounts his background with involvement in the Perth Group, who were key players in challenging the dogma around AIDS and the alleged HIV virus in the 1980s. He also cites the publication “Continuum” from that era, and informs us that back issues are still available on line, even though the publication is no longer in print. It remain a treasure trove of information that is highly relevant to the medical issues of today. The key difference being that today our political freedom is at stake with lock downs, quarantines and governments taking complete control of society in the name of public health.
Continuum was a dissident AIDS journal based in London in the 1990s – all editions available here: https://www.immunity.org.uk/continuum/
In Continuum’s January/February 1996 edition, the magazine began offering £1,000 to the first person who could find a scientific study that proved the isolation of HIV – see small box advert (top right) on page 4 here: https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v3n5.pdf
Peter Duesberg tried to claim the prize and wrote an article for the magazine in its July/August 1996 issue but his claim was rejected because it did not meet the conditions. Here is Duesberg’s claim on pages 8-9 of this PDF: https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v4n2.pdf source: Continuun 4 (2), July/August 1996.
In the following edition of Continuum, The Perth Group responded, see Special Supplement (Virus Isolation Special) beginning on page 17 https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v4n3.pdf source: Continuum 4(3), September/October 1996.
Back in 2000, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa brought together mainstream and non-mainstream scientists to discuss the isolation of HIV and the causation of AIDS at two meetings called the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel. Dr Corbett attended the first one of these with Joan Shenton.
The experiments that The Perth Group stipulated should have been undertaken to prove the isolation and the pathogen...
Ep 157 A Brief History of Deception – and the context in which to see it
In order to best understand the world we live in it is crucial to think in terms of fundamentals and to be philosophically aware. One must have a basic knowledge of philosophy and preferably of Ayn Rand’s philosophy Objectivism. When the full context is held in mind its clear that there is no great awakening happening, and the claim that such is the case is a counter-productive call to inaction.
As little as a century ago the average person had far more common sense than people today and they were less gullible because they were more anchored in the real world than we are today. Of course, the context was different and they did not have the technological ability to access information and therefore uncover the truth had they been inclined to investigate. And unlike us they had no track record of broken promises and obvious false claims to stimulate suspicion.
3 contextual points:
The first contextual idea to bear in mind is that men have been controlling other men since the very beginning of human interactions. Let’s remind ourselves of the concept of slavery and that until the mid 1800s it was a ubiquitous fact of human life across the globe.
It is also no secret that there are many voices calling for a New World Order that is essentially one world government as a means of political control. This idea is not championed by ordinary people on the street, it is championed by the super wealthy and their “think tanks” and those calling the shots – the parasite class.
The second point is that central banking – the key means of controlling nations by controlling the money supply – has been around a long time. It was established in England with the charter of the Bank of England in 1694. The model spread across Europe, and has become the means by which wealthy private shareholders of these central banks control the money supply and thereby the economy of their respective countries.
The third point I want to make is philosophical.
The renaissance of the 15th and 16th centuries was the rebirth of REASON as man’s guiding principle since the ancient Greece. It was a period when mysticism gave way to a rational approach to human life. The key features of the thinking of this period were that reality was held to be an objective absolute and that it was considered knowable to the human mind. Not everyone held these ideas, but they came to dominate European culture for a brief period. The result was the scientific and industrial revolutions, and massive progress of humanity out of poverty and into an age of technological growth and development.
The two ideas of an objective reality and therefore a knowable reality gave birth to scientific method and a string of key discoveries such as electricity and electric lighting, the internal combustion engine, and many more. But also, these ideas gave birth to the USA, the first free nation on earth. You see, when reason is mans dominant guiding principle, mankind recognises the objective nature of reality and grasps that knowledge is possible to the human mind – that the mind is competent to know reality. These ideas always go together, and they lead to individualism and political freedom.
But in 1781 the publication of a book called “A critique of Pure Reason” by a German Philosopher called Emmanuel Kant, saw the beginning of the reversal of these dominant ideas. Setting himself up a champion of reason (in a typical Trojan horse tactic of the intellectual variety) Kant proceeded to destroy the concept and precipitated a U-turn in the philosophical direction of western culture. It didn’t happen overnight, but the seeds were sown for the key ideas that a) reality is created by consciousness, and b) that reality is unknowable. Kant (and his promoters) reversed the thinking trend of the Renaissance and began the trend to undermine man’s mind by undermining our grasp of reality and our ability to know it.
Ep 156 Science, health and philosophy outside the Matrix – with Dr Andrew Kaufman
Dr Andy Kaufman has become one of the foremost rational thinker of today. In his questioning of the pandemic narrative he went directly to the fundamentals and sought proof of the existence of the virus and the evidence for and against the predominant paradigm of germ theory in medicine. He followed in the footsteps of Nancy Turner Banks and others such as Stephan Lanka and picked up the thread of those questioning the existence of any HIV virus that allegedly causes AIDS. His scrupulous investigation and unceasing demand for evidence that could not be produced led him to the inevitable conclusion that there are no viruses. No one has ever shown a virus to exist by isolating it from all other organic matter in the proper dictionary definition of the term – separating from everything else.
The implications of this are enormous. You have nothing to fear in ‘catching’ a disease from a virus. It means the Pandemic was a hoax, that vaccinations are a waste of time and no means to immunity. It means that wearing masks and locking people down is useless to prevent disease. In short it constitutes proof that we have all been lied to on this crucial medical issue! It highlights the facts that uncovering a lie, or discovering a false claim, has immense value in seeking truth.
Andy points out the necessity of using logic in your thinking process, and the importance of being aware of logical fallacies. These are apparent logical arguments (or reasons to believe something) that on closer inspection, or more considered thinking, turn out to be false and not reasons for anything at all.
I wanted to get philosophical with Andy because one of the core logical fallacies that is responsible for almost all modern illogical thinking is one identified by Ayn Rand. She called it the fallacy of the stolen concept. It is when you use a concept (or an idea) while implicitly contradicting or arguing against it by holding another idea to be true. Usually this fallacy is committed when people argue for or against an idea without knowing that they are implicitly contradicting another more fundamental concept (or idea) that they are already using. Its like inadvertently cutting off the branch you are standing on if you were climbing a tree.
examples of this fallacy include: championing freedom while standing against capitalism, championing freedom while holding that altruism and the code of self-sacrifice is a good thing, Believing that you can create your own reality while searching for truth, claiming to be a truth seeker while believing in a supernatural deity and other mystical ideas.
We covered a few logical fallacies but unfortunately I didn’t bring this one up. I was saddened to hear Andy say that it was logic that caused him to move away from atheism, since this is another logical fallacy. If one cannot find a rational (logical) explanation for any event or phenomena it is not rational (or logical) to reach for a non-logical one out of apparent ‘necessity’ of finding (inventing) some kind of explanation. Maybe we will get to discuss this in a future conversation.
The key point that is absolutely crucial is that mystical ideas in supernatural beings or that consciousness creates matter all implicitly undermine the objective nature of reality. As soon as we abandon this idea, that reality is a firm fixed absolute unaltered by consciousness, then we have abandoned truth and any rational argument. When the idea of reality as an objective absolute is rejected, there is no stopping tyranny or any form of violent oppress...
Ep 155 – Exploding the myth of the Big Bang
Understanding your world is a big task and it takes time, but one thing is very important as you embark on this journey. It’s essential to question ALL areas of so-called science, and not leave any one of them exempt from scrutiny. Don’t investigate only medical science (pandemics and viruses), and maybe political science (global collectivist agendas) and perhaps economic science (central banking and a debt-based fractional reserve global fiat currency system) etc, etc. If you are seeking truth you must be consistent and not hold astronomy and quantum physics as beyond suspicion. Especially since the implications of both and the ‘conclusions’ of quantum physics specifically support otherwise irrational and mystical ideas, such as “we create our own reality”, the primacy of consciousness, and thus destroy the concept of truth.
The Big Bang Theory is officially proposed as the rational and ‘scientific’ alternative to creationism, but the two are presented as a false dichotomy. There are more things to consider than just these two options! Rational people do not entertain the idea that a supreme being created the Universe any more than they do Santa Claus. There is no mystical need to accommodate religion and suppose a ‘moment of creation’, and in fact it is illogical/irrational to do so.
In Episode 155 of Living outside the Matrix, Nigel Howitt discusses the Big Bang theory with Patrik Holmqvist and Simon Shack (author of the Tychos – Our Geoaxial Binary Solar System). All the points below and many others are raised that call to question this universally accepted explanation for the origin of existence.
Logically speaking, it is crucial to recognise that when we talk about the Universe we are talking about existence. Meaning, everything that exists. This is not controversial, yet it needs to be clarified in order to think logically about whether or not it could possibly have ‘begun’ at any one point. When you hear people talking about the creation of the Universe, substitute the word ‘existence’ and you will get a better idea of the sense of what they are saying
What is the Big Bang Theory?
The Universe is said to have begun at a single point physically and temporally, and it is said to be continually expanding. It allegedly offers “offers a comprehensive explanation for a broad range of observed phenomena, such as redshift, cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), black holes, dark matter, event horizons and much more. In should be noted that the big bang as a concept resembles the fingerprint of a creator’s initial act. And thus fits nicely with a religious view of existence being created by god.
But the Big Bang theory is deeply questionable on closer scrutiny. First and foremost is it logically unsupportable and therefore inadmissible into rational discourse. Here’s why.
Nothing cannot be the cause of something. Understand that ‘nothing’ isn’t a different kind of something, it is no thing. Nothing is zero, the blank, the void, an absence of any existent thing or matter of any kind. Nothing is an absence of any existent thing, and as such it cannot be the cause of some other existent thing. Only something that exists can participate in causality. If something caused the existence of the universe, of all the galaxies and stars,
Ep 154 – The TYCHOS model of our geoaxial binary solar system
This is BIG news. An astronomy researcher in Italy, Simon Shack, has found the missing link in a model of the Solar System created by the most famous astronomer you have never heard of – Tycho Brahe. The Tychos model completely disproves the heliocentric (or Copernican) model that we have all been brought up with.
Most people do not know abut the numerous ‘anomalies’ with the heliocentric model. They are the evidence that the heliocentric model simply doesn’t explain the empirical evidence – what we see when we look up at the stars. Astronomers know about them and they are widely acknowledged. Yet even so, mainstream astronomy remains deaf to this exciting news. But don’t be put off by those classic logical fallacies, just because everyone else doesn’t yet accept this, and just because it is not the official explanation does NOT undermine its logical credentials. Suspend judgement until you have looked at the facts. THEN decide for yourself.
Aside from being the BIGGEST breakthrough in hundreds of years in the understanding of our solar system and our Universe, I also like to consider this issue as the perfect test for one’s ability to think logically. Because when you take a dispassionate look at all the facts, when you grasp that all of the observed data (from centuries of painstaking collection by hundreds of renowned astronomers) fits into (and is accommodated by) this model, without any contradictions, inventive theorizing or fudging, it is difficult not to accept this as the most accurate model of the way our solar system actually moves around us.
The Tychos Model
Tycho Brahe was a celebrated Danish nobleman and astronomer who developed what was the most widely accepted model of the solar system for at least a century. His assistant, Johannes Kepler, came up with the idea of elliptical orbits to fudge Brahe’s data to ‘fit’ the Copernican/heliocentric model shortly after Tycho Brahe untimely death in suspicious circumstances in 1601. There is a lot of evidence in the historical record that undermines Kepler’s character and raises serious suspicion over his motives and his commitment to scientific method.
Simon Shack’s achievement has been to fit the final piece into the puzzle. He has integrated many of the anomalous observations of the heliocentric model and inferred the Earths own orbit which takes 25344 years. In doing so, all of the anomalies of the heliocentric model disappear and a perfect model that explains everything we actually see emerges. This is massive news!
If you think about it, its possible to deduce one’s own motion by observing the relative motion of things around us – the parallax. We do this all the time from car, train and plane windows. In the same way astronomers can observe the various and numerous instances of parallax between Earth and all the other celestial bodies, as well as a host of other observational data, and then infer Earth’s motion. The problem is that when we try to reconcile the vast body of collected observed data it doesn’t fit with the heliocentric model, in spite of all the assertions that it has been incontrovertibly proven. All sorts of ludicrous inventions have had to be invoked to ‘explain away’ the many things that don’t fit. But daring to think outside the box, Simon Shack hypothesised that the earth itself is moving around its own orbit. By making some basic calculations and then integrating this idea into Tycho Brahe’s geocentric binary model of the solar system, Simon was able to refine his calculations to the point where everything fits! The earths (PVP) orbit takes 25,344 years to complete and explains the precession of the equinoxes and host of other observed phenomena. It is the missing piece of the puzzle that has eluded astronomers for centuries!
Nigel touches on deep topics with a relaxed and easy listening style
Excellent as well as informative.
Easy listening. Delivered in plain and simple terms.
Dull and rambling