7 Reasons Why Genetically Modified Foods Will Never Be Labeled And Why It Won’t Matter In The Future

Just spreading the information about GMO foods…

There are many arguments in favor of mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMO). However, corporate lobbyists have been very effective in preventing any GMO labeling legislation from being enacted into law. The public is in favor of the idea, but politicians are only on board until voting polls close after which point they revert back to the corporate ideology preventing people from ever knowing the truth about what’s in their food. In the west, the probability of such laws ever being passed are very unlikely. Hate to be a party pooper, but here are 7 reasons why GMO foods will never be labeled.
At least 21 countries and the European Union have established some form of mandatory labeling, but the food industry in the EU and US are two different beasts.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration currently requires labeling of GMO foods if the food has a significantly different nutritional property; if a new food includes an allergen that consumers would not expect to be present (e.g., a peanut protein in a soybean product); or if a food contains a toxicant beyond acceptable limits.

Even though it does exist, the generally accepted science of GMO foods does not clearly distinguish between its nutritional properties and those of non-GMO foods. Allergens are also known to be present in GMO foods, but this is largely ignored by the FDA. Also, now that the EPA has allowed Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicide at levels 60 times above toxic exposure for canola, soy, sunflower, flax and peanuts, it’s a free pass to chemically spray most GMO foods beyond acceptable limits.

To government scientists, it’s all the same and they don’t see a difference, not because one doesn’t exist, but because they refuse to acknowledge it.

Monsanto writes “There is no need to test the safety of GM foods”. So long as the engineered protein is safe, foods from GM crops are substantially equivalent and they cannot pose any health risks.” The US Food and Drug Administration waived all levels of safety testing in 1996 before approving the commercialization of these crops. Nothing more than voluntary research is necessary, and the FDA does not even want to see the results. And there is certainly no need to publish any of it. If you remember 1996, the year that the first crops were commercialized, the research scientists of the US FDA all predicted that transgenic crops would have unpredictable hard to detect side effects, allergens, toxins, nutritional effects, new diseases.

Unless you are geographically located in a dozen or so countries in the world who have declared GMO (genetically modified organism) bans, then you’re likely eating GMO. It’s almost impossible to avoid all GMO foods, however educating yourself can make a big difference in the percentage of GMO foods you purchase as a consumer.

Although consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, especially concerning products for which health and environmental concerns have been raised, there are 7 reasons why they are unlikely to be be identified on any labeled food products:

1. Mandatory labeling would allow consumers to identify and steer clear of food products that cause them problems. This would cause a ripple effect on the entire food industry causing information campaigns on some of the largest and most successful brands in the world, effectively removing their popularity through incremental education.

2. For religious or ethical reasons, many people want to avoid eating animal products, including animal DNA. More GMO foods are now being engineered with insect DNA and more experiments are taking place with animal DNA. If consumers were more informed through labeling initiatives, it would cause a massive backlash on well known brands of processed foods by these groups. Transgenic animals and crops would also come under fire.

3. Labels on GMO foods would imply a warning about detrimental health effects, which would stir controversy among millions who strive daily to maintain or advance their levels of health and wellness through dietary strategies. There are significant differences between GMO and conventional foods in terms of side effects, allergens, toxins, nutritional effects, and new diseases. Although no nutritional or allergenic differences are acknowledged by the FDA, labeling foods as GMO would immediately place the decision making process back into the hands of the consumer by-passing the regulatory agency’s control.

4. Labeling of GMO foods to fulfill the desires of health conscious consumers would come at a consequence to all food manufacturers who use GMO ingredients. Experience with mandatory labeling in the European Union, Japan, and New Zealand has not resulted in consumer choice. Rather, retailers have eliminated GMO products from their shelves due to perceived consumer aversion to GMO products. Can you imagine what the effect would be in the US?

5. Consumers who want to buy non-GMO foods currently have an option to purchase certified organic foods, which by definition cannot be produced with GMO ingredients. Labeling GMO ingredients would also affect the entire organic foods industry now generating hundreds of millions in revenue. Many consumers would revert back to conventional foods if they learned they did not contain GMO ingredients. This would cause a loss in profits to some large food manufacturers who have organic divisions within their brands.

6. If GMO foods were segregated from non-GMO foods, the food system infrastructure (storage, processing, and transportation facilities) would need to change drastically in a short period of time to accommodate the need for this change. The cost of labeling involves far more than the paper and ink to print the actual label. Accurate labeling requires an extensive identity preservation system from farmer to elevator to grain processor to food manufacturer to retailer. Either testing or detailed record-keeping needs to be done at various steps along the food supply chain. It would be very chaotic and the expense would go down the tubes if the majority of consumers avoided foods labeled as containing GMO ingredients. It’s a process the food industry knows would be extremely painful if it were to ever materialize.

7. If anti-GMO activists won the fight to pass GMO labeling legislation, it would set a precedent to every other highly controversial health topic in the hands of regulatory agencies. What next? Public health agencies would then be at risk at losing their credibility on other hot topics of debate such as fluoride in drinking water or vaccination. If populations were to win one huge battle that would free them from being incrementally poisoned, all government policy would be then be scrutinized and consumer advocate groups would stop at nothing to ensure all toxic public health policy would be dumped. It’s a loss of control and that’s something the cartels of the world are not interested in.

What’s The Solution and What Does The Future Hold?

If you haven’t figured out yet that our governments are not our best health and safety advocates, you haven’t been paying attention. We need to take the control away from the government and put it back into the hands of the people.

Content-based verification requires testing foods for the physical presence of foreign DNA or protein. A current application of this type of procedure is the analysis and labeling of vitamin content of foods. Methods for detecting the presence of GMO components in crops and processed foods are being discussed all over the world.

As the number of transgenes in commercialized crops increases, the techniques for detecting an array of different transgenes are becoming more sophisticated and even portable.

In the not too distant future, consumers will be able to run on-the-spot tests for environmental toxins, GMOs, pesticides, food safety and more with their smartphones and other hand-held devices.

“Modern biological research is also allowing an extension of laboratory devices on to small computer chips to detect biological information within DNA sequences,” said biotech specialist Dr. Marek Banaszewski. “Bioinformatic algorithms within programs will aid the identification of transgenes, promoters, and other functional elements of DNA, making detection of genetically modified foods on-the-spot and real-time without transportation to a laboratory.”

In a paper published in the journal Lab on a Chip, the team demonstrated sensing of an immune system protein, but the slide could be primed for any type of biological molecule or cell type. The researchers are working to improve the manufacturing process for the iPhone cradle and are working on a cradle for Android phones as well. They hope to begin making the cradles available next year.

Other handheld devices currently in development are portable chemiluminescence detectors, but based on enzyme-catalyzed reactions emitting light. The detection devices for nucleic acids, biotin associated with the target DNA provides the handle for the chemiluminescent detection. The non-radioactive DNA detection chemistry will be able to readily identify single-copy genes in transgenic plants making them suitable for GMO detection.


Natasha Longo has a master’s degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany.



Here is a documentary about Monsanto and you soon realize that it’s the Beast from Hell…



“Truth has rough flavours if we bite it through.”

The Clementine conspiracy – a.k.a. Project Golden Dragon

I have always has some thoughts, that NASA isn’t telling the whole truth about moon and all the space missions. So here is another interesting case called “Project Golden Dragon”.

This is an updated version of “Project Golden Dragon”.

Before you watch this video please read this message:

This project is based on a personal “theory” about a major conspiracy by the US Department of Defense, a whistle-blower who left cryptographic clues and finally complete exposure of an obfuscated object found in the Zeeman crater.

* * * This is no scientific build disclosure (yet). * * *

This presentation is the result of 14 years of research; collecting data, analyzing and making enhancements using high-end forensic image enhancement software. I needed a very long time myself to look past the strange shape. Do not expect to see the machine immediately. Your eyes and mind need time to adapt so take your time and try not to think too hard of alien technology. You probably have an expectation what “technology on the Moon” may look like but this machine is unlike anything you have ever seen. In order to see it you must A) be willing to accept the impossible, B) free your mind and C) capable of “out of the box” thinking. Note: I cannot promise that you will see the alien technology. All depends on your willingness to accept that there is life outside Earth atmosphere. Only users who are fully open to extraterrestrial technology and who are able to watch this video without prejudice will have a better chance to comprehend the images.

English is not my native language, so perhaps Roc Hatfield, author of 2 books “Ancient man On the Moon” and “Moon Base Cover Up?” may have a proper description of what to expect:

“Our brains are not used to seeing Alien Technology so it might take a few minutes to see it. It is clearly a vast machine. I was able to make out a number of features after looking at it for a long time. It is made of thousands of inter-locking plates, like scales on an alligator. I believe this allows it to undulate like a snake or caterpillar. The machine is so long that it needs to flex in order to set flat on the lunar surface. If it was ridged it would be like a pencil on a basketball, both ends would be in the air when the middle was on the ground. By being flexible it can wrap it’s huge length around the curvature of the Moon’s surface.

The machine is a mining crawler that takes in moon material at the front using a giant gantry and processes it on board in a massive on board factory. I believe the machine can fly and has been to earth in the past. Could be the dragons seen by ancient Chinese people. It looks like a dragon from the side”.

That really was a thorough description. Before people start telling me that this is all fantasy: My conclusions are based on facts (though non-scientific build) and for those who watch the video entirely they will know that I did not build my theory on a single gray-scale picture. There are still a lot of unanswered questions for which I too do not have an answer.

From ALL your comments I will create a sequel and try to give throrough explanations but I might not have an answer for every question. I am still full of questions myself.

At the time I finished this video I had serious vocal problems and therefore used a text to voice application. This resulted in a “robotic sounding voice” for which I must apologize.
For those who still think that I am hiding myself behind a synthetic voice, just watch my other videos. Furthermore do not believe any disinfo agent comments about me. I have no political agenda. I am just interested in the truth.

Your comments are appreciated but do not lecture me on how I should (have) perform(ed) my research, do not question my honesty, don’t act like an imagery expert when you are not, no swearing, insults, fascist remarks, off topic commentary, criticize narration or presentation, do not compare my videos with Luna Cognita’s – we are different and work in a different manner. I will ban annoying photoshop-experts, trolls, black-listed debunkers, shills, religious fanatics, vague people, saboteurs, drunk- and drugged Youtubers, musicians (I am neither interested in you nor your music) and finally money makers!

I am NOT doing this for the money: My Playback-based gross revenue $0.00*

Enjoy the presentation and spread the news! Make this disclosure to a success!




“In all perception of the truth there is a divine ecstasy, an inexpressible delirium of joy, as when a youth embraces his betrothed virgin.”

Something from the history…

This video is from 1964. It just makes you wonder why we have to be suppressed all of this information. There must to be an end to this dark cabal and it seems that we have to demand disclosure. Otherwise we just have to keep on going in the darkness…

This recording is from the KVOS Channel 12 Films, Center for Pacific Northwest Studies, Western Washington University, Bellingham WA.

700 year old Nordics, Space Travel, Time travel (f =1/T), technology swap.

In 1952, over a week before the events of the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO incident George-Van-Tassel notified the US air force, Los Angeles Herald-Examiner and the Life (magazine) of the future events of the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO incident via registered letters.[6] This event was witnessed by thousands of people in and around the Washington D.C. area. It is one of the most publicized sightings to have ever taken place.

Author, inventor and controversial UFO advocate. Some agreed, some disagreed with his philosophy.
None found him boring.

FAIR USE NOTICE: These pages/video may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, POLITICAL, HUMAN RIGHTS, economic, DEMOCRACY, scientific, MORAL, ETHICAL, and SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational.



“They frequently find the truth who do not seek it, they who do, frequently lose it.”
FANNY KEMBLE, Further Records, Feb. 8, 1875

Information packet provided by finnish doctor Rauni Kilde

I just have to post something about this great person called Rauni Kilde here from Finland. She has much information about paranormal, aliens, ufology, mind control etc.

Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde.jpg

Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde in 2012.

Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde (born Värtsilä, 15 November 1939) is a Finnish physician who has been an author and lecturer on parapsychology, ufology and mind control since 1982. She now lives in Norway.

Luukanen-Kilde had to flee with her family in infancy during the Second World War and was raised in Helsinki.[1] She studied medicine at the universities of Oulu and Turku, graduating in 1967. She was at one point the only medical practitioner at the hospital in Pelkosenniemi, performing dental and veterinary work as well.[2] In March 1975, she became a provincial medical officer in Rovaniemi, Lapland;[1] she became chief medical officer for Lapland.[2][3]

In 1982, as Rauni-Leena Luukonen, she published Kuolemaa ei ole (There Is No Death).[4] She has been interested in the paranormal since she was a teenager, but her interest in UFOs may date to a 1985 car accident which led to her retirement. She has since been a featured speaker at UFO conferences, helped organize the first international conference on extraterrestrials in Finland[5] and authored books about UFOs, alien abductions, mind control and conspiracy theories. Luukanen-Kilde has claimed to have been “rescued” from danger by extraterrestrials, and to have esoteric skills and knowledge as a result of her relationship with them. She maintains that there is a secret exchange program between humans and aliens that is being deliberately suppressed by “powerful Western governments”, particularly the United States.[1] Luukanen-Kilde also claims there are secret military and intelligence agencies practising mind control technology on the world population using cell phones and supercomputers and that a plot to kill most of the Earth’s population using the swine flu vaccine is being carried out by the WHO, Henry Kissinger, and the Bilderberg Group.[6] Her article on cybernetic implants as a means of control is widely circulated.[7] She appears in the 1999 film Revelations: The End Times, Volume 2.

Luukonen-Kilde has lived in Norway since 1992;[8] she married a Norwegian diplomat in 1987.[1]


Lucas Alexander presents for “Age Of Truth*TV” – Dr. RAUNI KILDE ~ “The Grande Dame Of Consciousness” an exstraordinary interview-documentary with former Medical Chief Officer Dr. Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, who worked as a highly acclaimed physician in Finland and was also a representative for WHO and Red Cross. She has worked professionally all over the world and has done extensive research.

She is a widely published author of several books translated into 6 different languages, focusing on the Paranormal, Parapsychology, Clairvoyance, Telepathy, UFOlogy, Conspiracy & Truth Research, Medical and Pharmaceutical Awareness, Natural Medicine, Vaccinations, Politics, Banking System, Consciousness, Secret Societies, Elite Rituals, Astronomy, Science, Alien Technology, Free Energy, Teleportation and Mind Control.

Dr. Rauni Kilde is known as the female David Icke and has been one of the first to publically write books on controversial topics not reported in the media. She was married to a Norweigian diplomat and has spent a great deal of time in the United States. She travels the world to give lectures and speeches, interviews and debates with other truth researchers.

Age Of Truth Presents
Dr. Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde
Presented by
Lucas Alexander
for Age Of Truth TV


Little bit food for thought…

 “Tell all the Truth but tell it slant–
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth’s superb surprise.”
EMILY DICKINSON, Tell all the Truth but tell it slant–

9/11 Pentagon Attack – Behind the Smoke Curtain

I just found this great presentation about Pentagon attack. It just backs up th 9/11 conspiracy:

Barbara Honegger’s presentation titled “Behind the Smoke Curtain” in Seattle’s Town Hall Theater, January 12, 2013, on what happened and what didn’t happen at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

To purchase the DVD please send an email to bshonegg@gmail.com with the subject “DVD Request”. To request a speaking event with Barbara Honegger please use the same email with the subject “Speaking Event”.

You can also purchase the “Behind the Smoke Curtain” DVD at http://911ts.org

You can download this video for free at http://archive.org/details/BTSC-051113D

Links mentioned in this video:

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth: http://ae911truth.org

Patriots Question 9/11: http://patriotsquestion911.com

Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth: http://pl911truth.com

Aaron Russo’s offer from Nicholas Rockefeller: http://youtu.be/iSii-xWoyKM

Another version of Wesley Clarke’s statement: http://youtu.be/SXS3vW47mOE

International Conference in Malaysia, 2012, “9/11 Revisited — Seeking the Truth”:

9/11 Truth Seattle: http://911ts.org

A Video by Mark Snyder
File: BTSC051113D.MP4

A presentation by Barbara Honegger, M.S.

Music by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) used under creative commons license.

Copyright © 2013 Barbara Honegger and Mark Snyder
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – Permission is granted to reproduce, distribute and/or embed this video as is, in its entirety, and unaltered in any way.

And here is the presentation:


And as always you decide…

 “Truth will only make you unpopular.”

Silenced people, Robin Cook (murdered)

Was a British Labour Party politician Robin Cook a victim of NWO?

Robin Cook

Robin Cook-close crop.jpg
Leader of the House of Commons
Lord President of the Council
In office
8 June 2001 – 17 March 2003

Robert Finlayson “Robin” Cook (28 February 1946 – 6 August 2005) was a British Labour Partypolitician, who was the Member of Parliament (MP) for Livingston from 1983 until his death, and served in the Cabinet as Foreign Secretary from 1997 to 2001.

He studied at the University of Edinburgh before becoming a Member of Parliament for Edinburgh Central in 1974. In parliament he was noted for his debating ability which saw his rise through the political ranks and ultimately to the Cabinet.

He resigned from his positions as Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons on 17 March 2003 in protest against the invasion of Iraq. At the time of his death, he was President of the Foreign Policy Centre and a vice-president of the America All Party Parliamentary Group and the Global Security and Non-Proliferation All Party Parliamentary Group.

Early life

Robin Cook was born in the County Hospital, Bellshill, Scotland, the only son of Peter and Christina Cook (née Lynch). His father was a chemistry teacher who grew up in Fraserburgh, and his grandfather was a miner before being blacklisted for being involved in a strike.

Cook was educated at Aberdeen Grammar School and, from 1960, the Royal High School in Edinburgh. At first, Cook intended to become a Church of Scotland minister, but lost his faith as he discovered politics. He joined the Labour Party in 1965 and became an atheist. He remained so for the rest of his life. He then studied English Literature at the University of Edinburgh, where he obtained an MA with Honours in English Literature. He began studying for a PhD on Charles Dickens and Victorian serial novels, supervised by John Sutherland, but gave it up in 1970.

In 1971, after a period working as a secondary school teacher, Cook became a tutor-organiser of the Workers’ Educational Association for Lothian, and a local councillor in Edinburgh. He gave both up when elected a member of parliament on his 28th birthday, in February 1974.

Personal life

Cook also worked as a racing tipster in his spare time. He was introduced to horse racing by his wife, Margaret Katherine Whitmore, from Somerset, whom he met whilst at Edinburgh University. They married on 15 September 1969 at St Alban’s Church, Westbury Park, Bristol and had two sons, Peter and Christopher, born in February 1973 and May 1974. Between 1991 and 1998 Cook wrote a weekly tipster’s column for the Glasgow Herald newspaper.

Shortly after he became Foreign Secretary, Cook ended his marriage with Margaret, revealing that he had an extra-marital affair with one of his staff, Gaynor Regan.[1] He announced his intentions to leave his wife and marry another woman via a press statement made at Heathrow on 2 August 1997. Cook was forced into a decision over his private life after a telephone conversation with Alastair Campbell as he was about to go on holiday with his first wife. Campbell explained that the press was about to break the story of his affair with Regan. His estranged wife subsequently accused him of being insensitive during their marriage, of having had several extramarital affairs and alleged he was an alcoholic.

Robin married Regan in Tunbridge Wells, Kent[2] on 9 April 1998, four weeks after his divorce was finalised.

Early years in Parliament

Cook unsuccessfully contested the Edinburgh North constituency in the 1970 general election, but was elected to the House of Commons at the February 1974 general election as Member of Parliament for Edinburgh Central, defeating George Foulkes for nomination. When the constituency boundaries were revised for the 1983 general election, he transferred to the new Livingston constituency, beating Tony Benn to the selection, which he represented until his death.

In parliament, he joined the left-wingTribune Group of the Parliamentary Labour Party and frequently opposed the policies of the Wilson and Callaghan governments. He was an early supporter of constitutional and electoral reform (although he opposed devolution in the 1979 referendum, eventually coming out in favour on election night in 1983), and of efforts to gain more women MPs. He also supported unilateral nuclear disarmament and the abandoning of the Labour Party’s euroscepticism of the 1970s and 1980s. During his early years in parliament Cook championed several liberalising social measures, to mixed effect. He repeatedly (and unsuccessfully) introduced a private member’s bill on divorce reform in Scotland, but succeeded in July 1980 — and after three years’ trying—with an amendment to bring the Scottish law on homosexuality into line with that in England.

After Labour lost power in May 1979 Cook encouraged Michael Foot‘s bid to become party leader and joined his campaign committee. When Tony Benn challenged Denis Healey for the party’s deputy leadership in September 1981, Cook supported Healey.

In opposition

He became known as a brilliant parliamentary debater, and rose through the party ranks, becoming a frontbench spokesman in 1980, and reaching the Shadow Cabinet in 1987, as Shadow Social Services Secretary. He was campaign manager for Neil Kinnock‘s successful 1983 bid to become leader of the Labour Party, and was one of the key figures in the modernisation of the Labour Party under Kinnock. He was Shadow Health Secretary (1987–92) and Shadow Trade Secretary (1992–94), before taking on foreign affairs in 1994, the post he would become most identified with (Shadow Foreign Secretary 1994-97, Foreign Secretary 1997-2001).

In 1994, following the death of John Smith, he ruled himself out of contention for the Labour leadership, apparently on the grounds that he was “insufficiently attractive” to be an election winner, although two close family bereavements in the week in which the decision had to be made may have contributed.

Despite his role in modernising the party under Kinnock and Smith, Cook was said to be never fully committed to Blair’s “New Labour” project, considering it a step too far to the right.

On 26 February 1996, following the publication of the Scott Report into the ‘Arms-to-Iraq‘ affair, he made a famous speech in response to the then President of the Board of Trade Ian Lang in which he said “this is not just a Government which does not know how to accept blame; it is a Government which knows no shame”. His parliamentary performance on the occasion of the publication of the five-volume, 2,000-page Scott Report — which he claimed he was given just two hours to read before the relevant debate, thus giving him three seconds to read every page — was widely praised on both sides of the House as one of the best performances the Commons had seen in years, and one of Cook’s finest hours. The government won the vote by a majority of one.

As Joint Chairman (alongside Liberal Democrat MP Robert Maclennan) of the Labour-Liberal Democrat Joint Consultative Committee on Constitutional Reform, Cook brokered the ‘Cook-Maclennan Agreement’ that laid the basis for the fundamental reshaping of the British constitution outlined in Labour’s 1997 General Election manifesto. This led to legislation for major reforms including Scottish and Welsh devolution, the Human Rights Act and removing the majority of hereditary peers from the House of Lords. Others have remained elusive so far, such as a referendum on the electoral system and further House of Lords reform. However, in 2011 voters in the United Kingdom were finally given the chance to have their say on replacing the first-past-the-post voting system with the Alternative Vote method in a referendum held on 5 May. On 6 May it was announced that any proposed move to the AV voting system had been rejected by the minority of the electorate who voted by a margin of 67.9% to 32.1%.

In government

Foreign Secretary

With the election of a Labour government at the 1997 general election, Cook became Foreign Secretary. He was believed to have coveted the job of Chancellor of the Exchequer, but that job was reportedly promised by Tony Blair to Gordon Brown. He announced, to much scepticism, his intention to add “an ethical dimension” to foreign policy.

His term as Foreign Secretary was marked by British interventions in Kosovo and Sierra Leone. Both of these were controversial, the former because it was not sanctioned by the UN Security Council, and the latter because of allegations that the British company Sandline International had supplied arms to supporters of the deposed president in contravention of a United Nations embargo. Cook was also embarrassed when his apparent offer to mediate in the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir was rebuffed. The ethical dimension of his policies was subject to inevitable scrutiny, leading to criticism at times.

He is credited with having helped resolve the eight-year impasse over the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial by getting Libya to agree to hand over the two accused (Megrahi and Fhimah) in 1999, for trial in the neutral venue of the Netherlands but according to Scots law.

In March 1998, a diplomatic rift ensued with Israel when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu angrily cancelled a dinner with Cook, while Cook was visiting Israel and had demonstrated opposition to the expansion of Israeli settlements.[3]

Leader of the House of Commons

After the 2001 general election he was moved, against his wishes, from the Foreign Office to be Leader of the House of Commons. This was widely seen as a demotion — although it is a Cabinet post, it is substantially less prestigious than the Foreign Office — and Cook nearly turned it down. In the event he accepted, and looking on the bright side welcomed the chance to spend more time on his favourite stage. According to The Observer,[4] it was Blair’s fears over political battles within the Cabinet over Europe, and especially the euro, which saw him unexpectedly demote the pro-European Cook.

As Leader of the House he was responsible for reforming the hours and practices of the Commons and for leading the debate on reform of the House of Lords. He also spoke for the Government during the controversy surrounding the membership of Commons Select Committees which arose in 2001, where Government whips were accused of pushing aside the outspoken committee chairs Gwyneth Dunwoody and Donald Anderson. He was President of the Party of European Socialists from May 2001 to April 2004.

In early 2003, during a live television appearance on BBC current affairs show Question Time, he was inadvertently referred to as “Robin Cock” by David Dimbleby. Cook responded with attempted good humour with “Yes, David Bumblebee”, and Dimbleby apologised twice on air for his slip. The episode also saw Cook in the uncomfortable position of defending the Government’s stance over the impending invasion of Iraq, weeks before his resignation over the issue.

He documented his time as Leader of the House of Commons in a widely acclaimed book ‘The Point of Departure’, which discussed in diary form his efforts to reform the House of Lords and to persuade his ministerial colleagues, including Tony Blair, to distance the Labour Government from the foreign policy of the Bush administration. The former Political Editor of Channel 4 News, Elinor Goodman called the book ‘the best insight yet into the workings of the Blair cabinet’, whilst the former Editor of The Observer, Will Hutton, called it ‘the political book of the year – a lucid and compelling insider’s account of the two years that define the Blair Prime Ministership’.

Resignation over Iraq war

In early 2003 he was reported to be one of the cabinet’s chief opponents of military action against Iraq, and on 17 March he resigned from the Cabinet. In a statement giving his reasons for resigning he said, “I can’t accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.” He also praised Blair’s “heroic efforts” in pushing for the so-called second resolution regarding the Iraq disarmament crisis, but lamented “The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the international bodies of which we are a leading partner—not NATO, not the European Union and, now, not the Security Council”. Cook’s resignation speech in the House of Commons, received with an unprecedented standing ovation by fellow MPs, was described by the BBC‘s Andrew Marr as “without doubt one of the most effective, brilliant, resignation speeches in modern British politics.”[5] Most unusually for the British parliament, Cook’s speech was met with growing applause from all sides of the House (beginning with Labour and Liberal Democrat critics of the war), and from the public gallery. According to The Economists obituary, that was the first speech ever to receive a standing ovation in the history of the House.[6]

Outside the government

After his 2003 resignation from the Cabinet, Cook remained an active backbench Member of Parliament until his death. After leaving the Government, Cook was a leading analyst of the decision to go to war in Iraq, giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee which was later relevant during the Hutton and Butler inquiries. He was sceptical of the proposals contained in the Government’s Higher Education Bill, and abstained on its Second Reading.[7] He also took strong positions in favour of both the proposed European Constitution,[8] and a majority-elected House of Lords,[9][10] about which he said (whilst Leader of the Commons), “I do not see how [the House of Lords] can be a democratic second Chamber if it is also an election-free zone”.

In the years after his exit from the Foreign Office, and particularly since his resignation from the Cabinet, Cook made up with Gordon Brown after decades of personal animosity[11] — an unlikely reconciliation after a mediation attempt by Frank Dobson in the early 1990s had seen Dobson conclude (to John Smith) “You’re right. They hate each other.” Cook and Brown focused on their common political ground, discussing how to firmly entrench progressive politics after the exit of Tony Blair.[12]Chris Smith said in 2005 that in recent years Cook had been setting out a vision of “libertarian, democratic socialism that was beginning to break the sometimes sterile boundaries of ‘old’ and ‘New’ Labour labels.”.[13] With Blair’s popularity waning, Cook campaigned vigorously in the run-up to the 2005 general election to persuade Labour doubters to remain with the party.

In a column for the Guardian four weeks before his death, Cook caused a stir when he described Al-Qaeda as a product of a western intelligence:

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally “the database”, was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.[14]


Some commentators and senior politicians said that Cook seemed destined for a senior Cabinet post under a Brown premiership.[15]

In early August 2005, Cook and his wife, Gaynor, took a two-week holiday in the Highlands of Scotland. At around 2:20 pm, on 6 August 2005, whilst walking down Ben Stack in Sutherland, Scotland, Cook suddenly suffered a severe heart attack, collapsed, lost consciousness and fell about 8 ft down a ridge.[16] A helicopter containing paramedics arrived 30 minutes after a 999 call was made. Cook then was flown to Raigmore Hospital, Inverness. Gaynor did not get in the helicopter, and was left to walk down the mountain. Despite efforts made by the medical team to revive Cook in the helicopter, he was already beyond recovery, and at 4:05pm, minutes after arrival at the hospital, was pronounced dead. Two days later, a post mortem revealed that Cook died of hypertensive heart disease.

A funeral service was held on 12 August 2005, at St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, even though Cook had been an atheist.[17]Gordon Brown gave the eulogy, and German foreign minister Joschka Fischer was one of the guests. British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who was on holiday at the time, did not attend. In his speech at the funeral, Cook’s friend, the racing pundit John McCririck, criticised Blair for not attending.

A later memorial service at St Margaret’s Church, Westminster, on 5 December 2005, included a reading by Tony Blair and warm tributes by Gordon Brown and Madeleine Albright. On 29 September 2005, Cook’s friend and election agent since 1983, Jim Devine, won the resulting by-election with a reduced majority.

In January 2007, a headstone was erected in The Grange, Edinburgh Cemetery, where Cook is buried, bearing the epitaph: “I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of parliament to decide on war.” It is a reference to Cook’s strong opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the words were reportedly chosen by his widow and two sons from his previous marriage, Chris and Peter.[18]


Here’s a small video of why he could be assassinated by MI6:

 “All great truths begin as blasphemies.”

Nassim Haramein – The Pyramids & Orion Belt

I just love this guy and I have to post this update to Pyramid saga, because it’s just great.

Explore Orion’s Belt and the pyramids with physicist Nassim Haramein!

Nassim Haramein was born in Geneva, Switzerland in 1962. As early as 9 years old, Nassim was already developing the basis for a unified hyperdimensional theory of matter and energy, which he eventually called the ‘Holofractographic Universe.’

Haramein has spent most of his life researching the fundamental geometry of hyperspace, studying a variety of fields from theoretical physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology and chemistry to anthropology and ancient civilizations. Combining this knowledge with a keen observation of the behavior of nature, he discovered a specific geometric array that he found to be fundamental to creation and from which the foundation for his Unified Field Theory emerged.



There you have again something to think about…

“I never saw any good that came of telling truth.”
JOHN DRYDEN, Amphitryon

Motor of the past is the motor of the future

It looks like, that the future of motors is going to be so called Stirling engine, which is ecological and it produces free energy. Here I post you some history of it and then how to make your own motor at home.

Stirling engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Stirling engine is a heat engine operating by cyclic compression and expansion of air or other gas, the working fluid, at different temperature levels such that there is a net conversion of heat energy to mechanical work.[1][2] Or more specifically, a closed-cycle regenerative heat engine with a permanently gaseous working fluid, where closed-cycle is defined as a thermodynamic system in which the working fluid is permanently contained within the system, and regenerative describes the use of a specific type of internal heat exchanger and thermal store, known as the regenerator. It is the inclusion of a regenerator that differentiates the Stirling engine from other closed cycle hot air engines.

Originally conceived in 1816 as an industrial prime mover to rival the steam engine, its practical use was largely confined to low-power domestic applications for over a century.[3]

The Stirling engine is noted for its high efficiency compared to steam engines,[4] quiet operation, and the ease with which it can use almost any heat source. This compatibility with alternative and renewable energy sources has become increasingly significant as the price of conventional fuels rises, and also in light of concerns such as peak oil and climate change. This engine is currently exciting interest as the core component of micro combined heat and power (CHP) units, in which it is more efficient and safer than a comparable steam engine.[5][6]

Name and classification

Robert Stirling was the Scottish inventor of the first practical example of a closed cycle air engine in 1816, and it was suggested by Fleeming Jenkin as early as 1884 that all such engines should therefore generically be called Stirling engines. This naming proposal found little favour, and the various types on the market continued to be known by the name of their individual designers or manufacturers, e.g. Rider’s, Robinson’s, or Heinrici’s (hot) air engine. In the 1940s, the Philips company was seeking a suitable name for its own version of the ‘air engine’, which by that time had been tested with working fluids other than air, and decided upon ‘Stirling engine’ in April 1945.[7] However, nearly thirty years later Graham Walker still had cause to bemoan the fact such terms as ‘hot air engine’ continued to be used interchangeably with ‘Stirling engine’, which itself was applied widely and indiscriminately.[8]

Like the steam engine, the Stirling engine is traditionally classified as an external combustion engine, as all heat transfers to and from the working fluid take place through a solid boundary (heat exchanger) thus isolating the combustion process and any contaminants it may produce from the working parts of the engine. This contrasts with an internal combustion engine where heat input is by combustion of a fuel within the body of the working fluid.

There are many possible implementations of the Stirling engine most of which fall into the category of reciprocating piston engine.


Invention and early development

The Stirling engine (or Stirling’s air engine as it was known at the time) was invented and patented by Robert Stirling in 1816.[9] It followed earlier attempts at making an air engine but was probably the first to be put to practical use when in 1818 an engine built by Stirling was employed pumping water in a quarry.[10] The main subject of Stirling’s original patent was a heat exchanger which he called an “economiser” for its enhancement of fuel economy in a variety of applications. The patent also described in detail the employment of one form of the economiser in his unique closed-cycle air engine design[11] in which application it is now generally known as a “regenerator“. Subsequent development by Robert Stirling and his brother James, an engineer, resulted in patents for various improved configurations of the original engine including pressurization which had by 1843 sufficiently increased power output to drive all the machinery at a Dundee iron foundry.[12]

Though it has been disputed,[13] it is widely supposed that as well as saving fuel, the inventors were motivated to create a safer alternative to the steam engines of the time,[14] whose boilers frequently exploded, causing many injuries and fatalities.[15][16]

The need for Stirling engines to run at very high temperatures to maximize power and efficiency exposed limitations in the materials of the day, and the few engines that were built in those early years suffered unacceptably frequent failures (albeit with far less disastrous consequences than a boiler explosion[17]) — for example, the Dundee foundry engine was replaced by a steam engine after three hot cylinder failures in four years.[18]

Later nineteenth century

Subsequent to the failure of the Dundee foundry engine there is no record of the Stirling brothers having any further involvement with air engine development and the Stirling engine never again competed with steam as an industrial scale power source (steam boilers were becoming safer[19] and steam engines more efficient, thus presenting less of a target to rival prime movers). However, from about 1860 smaller engines of the Stirling/hot air type were produced in substantial numbers finding applications wherever a reliable source of low to medium power was required, such as raising water or providing air for church organs.[20] These generally operated at lower temperatures so as not to tax available materials, so were relatively inefficient. But their selling point was that, unlike a steam engine, they could be operated safely by anybody capable of managing a fire.[21] Several types remained in production beyond the end of the century, but apart from a few minor mechanical improvements the design of the Stirling engine in general stagnated during this period.[22]

Twentieth century revival

During the early part of the twentieth century the role of the Stirling engine as a “domestic motor”[23] was gradually taken over by the electric motor and small internal combustion engines. By the late 1930s, it was largely forgotten, only produced for toys and a few small ventilating fans.[24]

Around that time, Philips was seeking to expand sales of its radios into parts of the world where mains electricity was unavailable and batteries were not consistently available. Philips’ management decided that offering a low-power portable generator would facilitate such sales and asked a group of engineers at the company’s research lab in Eindhoven to evaluate alternative ways of achieving this aim. After a systematic comparison of various prime movers, the team decided to go forward with the Stirling engine, citing its quiet operation (both audibly and in terms of radio interference) and ability to run on a variety of heat sources (common lamp oil – “cheap and available everywhere” – was favored).[25] They were also aware that, unlike steam and internal combustion engines, virtually no serious development work had been carried out on the Stirling engine for many years and asserted that modern materials and know-how should enable great improvements.[26]

By 1951, the 180/200 W generator set designated MP1002CA (known as the “Bungalow set”) was ready for production and an initial batch of 250 was planned, but soon it became clear that they could not be made at a competitive price. Additionally, the advent of transistor radios and their much lower power requirements meant that the original rationale for the set was disappearing. Approximately 150 of these sets were eventually produced.[27] Some found their way into university and college engineering departments around the world[28] giving generations of students a valuable introduction to the Stirling engine.

Philips MP1002CA Stirling generator of 1951

In parallel with the Bungalow set, Philips developed experimental Stirling engines for a wide variety of applications and continued to work in the field until the late 1970s, but only achieved commercial success with the ‘reversed Stirling engine’ cryocooler. However, they filed a large number of patents and amassed a wealth of information, which they licensed to other companies and which formed the basis of much of the development work in the modern era.[29]

Functional description

The engine is designed so that the working gas is generally compressed in the colder portion of the engine and expanded in the hotter portion resulting in a net conversion of heat into work.[2] An internal Regenerative heat exchanger increases the Stirling engine’s thermal efficiency compared to simpler hot air engines lacking this feature.

Key components

As a consequence of closed cycle operation, the heat driving a Stirling engine must be transmitted from a heat source to the working fluid by heat exchangers and finally to a heat sink. A Stirling engine system has at least one heat source, one heat sink and up to five[clarification needed] heat exchangers. Some types may combine or dispense with some of these.

Heat source

Point focus parabolic mirror with Stirling engine at its center and its solar tracker at Plataforma Solar de Almería (PSA) in Spain

Dish Stirling from SES

The heat source may be provided by the combustion of a fuel and, since the combustion products do not mix with the working fluid and hence do not come into contact with the internal parts of the engine, a Stirling engine can run on fuels that would damage other types of engines’ internals, such as landfill gas which contains siloxane.

Other suitable heat sources include concentrated solar energy, geothermal energy, nuclear energy, waste heat and bioenergy. If solar power is used as a heat source, regular solar mirrors and solar dishes may be utilised. The use of Fresnel lenses and mirrors has also been advocated, for example in planetary surface exploration.[30] Solar powered Stirling engines are increasingly popular as they offer an environmentally sound option for producing power while some designs are economically attractive in development projects.[31]

Heater / hot side heat exchanger

In small, low power engines this may simply consist of the walls of the hot space(s) but where larger powers are required a greater surface area is needed in order to transfer sufficient heat. Typical implementations are internal and external fins or multiple small bore tubes.

Designing Stirling engine heat exchangers is a balance between high heat transfer with low viscouspumping losses and low dead space (unswept internal volume). With engines operating at high powers and pressures, the heat exchangers on the hot side must be made of alloys that retain considerable strength at temperature and that will also not corrode or creep.


In a Stirling engine, the regenerator is an internal heat exchanger and temporary heat store placed between the hot and cold spaces such that the working fluid passes through it first in one direction then the other. Its function is to retain within the system that heat which would otherwise be exchanged with the environment at temperatures intermediate to the maximum and minimum cycle temperatures,[32] thus enabling the thermal efficiency of the cycle to approach the limiting Carnot efficiency defined by those maxima and minima.

The primary effect of regeneration in a Stirling engine is to increase the thermal efficiency by ‘recycling’ internal heat which would otherwise pass through the engine irreversibly. As a secondary effect, increased thermal efficiency yields a higher power output from a given set of hot and cold end heat exchangers. It is these which usually limit the engine’s heat throughput. In practice this additional power may not be fully realized as the additional “dead space” (unswept volume) and pumping loss inherent in practical regenerators reduces the potential efficiency gains from regeneration.

The design challenge for a Stirling engine regenerator is to provide sufficient heat transfer capacity without introducing too much additional internal volume (‘dead space’) or flow resistance. These inherent design conflicts are one of many factors which limit the efficiency of practical Stirling engines. A typical design is a stack of fine metal wiremeshes, with low porosity to reduce dead space, and with the wire axes perpendicular to the gas flow to reduce conduction in that direction and to maximize convective heat transfer.[33]

The regenerator is the key component invented by Robert Stirling and its presence distinguishes a true Stirling engine from any other closed cycle hot air engine. Many small ‘toy’ Stirling engines, particularly low-temperature difference (LTD) types, do not have a distinct regenerator component and might be considered hot air engines, however a small amount of regeneration is provided by the surface of displacer itself and the nearby cylinder wall, or similarly the passage connecting the hot and cold cylinders of an alpha configuration engine.

Cooler / cold side heat exchanger

In small, low power engines this may simply consist of the walls of the cold space(s), but where larger powers are required a cooler using a liquid like water is needed in order to transfer sufficient heat.

Heat sink

The heat sink is typically the environment at ambient temperature. In the case of medium to high power engines, a radiator is required to transfer the heat from the engine to the ambient air. Marine engines can use the ambient water. In the case of combined heat and power systems, the engine’s cooling water is used directly or indirectly for heating purposes.

Alternatively, heat may be supplied at ambient temperature and the heat sink maintained at a lower temperature by such means as cryogenic fluid (see Liquid nitrogen economy) or iced water.


The displacer is a special-purpose piston, used in Beta and Gamma type Stirling engines, to move the working gas back and forth between the hot and cold heat exchangers. Depending on the type of engine design, the displacer may or may not be sealed to the cylinder, i.e. it may be a loose fit within the cylinder, allowing the working gas to pass around it as it moves to occupy the part of the cylinder beyond.


There are two major types of Stirling engines, that are distinguished by the way they move the air between the hot and cold sides of the cylinder:

  1. The two piston alpha type design has pistons in independent cylinders, and gas is driven between the hot and cold spaces.
  2. The displacement type Stirling engines, known as beta and gamma types, use an insulated mechanical displacer to push the working gas between the hot and cold sides of the cylinder. The displacer is large enough to insulate the hot and cold sides of the cylinder thermally and to displace a large quantity of gas. It must have enough of a gap between the displacer and the cylinder wall to allow gas to flow around the displacer easily.

Alpha Stirling

An alpha Stirling contains two power pistons in separate cylinders, one hot and one cold. The hot cylinder is situated inside the high temperature heat exchanger and the cold cylinder is situated inside the low temperature heat exchanger. This type of engine has a high power-to-volume ratio but has technical problems due to the usually high temperature of the hot piston and the durability of its seals.[34] In practice, this piston usually carries a large insulating head to move the seals away from the hot zone at the expense of some additional dead space.

Action of an alpha type Stirling engine

The following diagrams do not show internal heat exchangers in the compression and expansion spaces, which are needed to produce power. A regenerator would be placed in the pipe connecting the two cylinders. The crankshaft has also been omitted.

Alpha Stirling.gifThe complete alpha type Stirling cycle

Beta Stirling

A beta Stirling has a single power piston arranged within the same cylinder on the same shaft as a displacer piston. The displacer piston is a loose fit and does not extract any power from the expanding gas but only serves to shuttle the working gas between the hot and cold heat exchangers. When the working gas is pushed to the hot end of the cylinder it expands and pushes the power piston. When it is pushed to the cold end of the cylinder it contracts and the momentum of the machine, usually enhanced by a flywheel, pushes the power piston the other way to compress the gas. Unlike the alpha type, the beta type avoids the technical problems of hot moving seals.[35]

Action of a beta type Stirling engine

Again, the following diagrams do not show internal heat exchangers or a regenerator, which would be placed in the gas path around the displacer.

Stirling Animation.gifThe complete beta type Stirling cycle

Gamma Stirling

A gamma Stirling is simply a beta Stirling in which the power piston is mounted in a separate cylinder alongside the displacer piston cylinder, but is still connected to the same flywheel. The gas in the two cylinders can flow freely between them and remains a single body. This configuration produces a lower compression ratio but is mechanically simpler and often used in multi-cylinder Stirling engines.

Other types

Other Stirling configurations continue to interest engineers and inventors.

The rotary Stirling engine seeks to convert power from the Stirling cycle directly into torque, similar to the rotary combustion engine. No practical engine has yet been built but a number of concepts, models and patents have been produced for example the Quasiturbine engine.[36]

The hybrid between piston and rotary configuration is a double acting engine. This design rotates the displacers on either side of the power piston

Top view of two rotating displacer powering the horizontal piston. Regenerators and radiator removed for clarity

Another alternative is the Fluidyne engine (Fluidyne heat pump), which uses hydraulic pistons to implement the Stirling cycle. The work produced by a Fluidyne engine goes into pumping the liquid. In its simplest form, the engine contains a working gas, a liquid and two non-return valves.

The Ringbom engine concept published in 1907 has no rotary mechanism or linkage for the displacer. This is instead driven by a small auxiliary piston, usually a thick displacer rod, with the movement limited by stops.[37][38]

The two-cylinder Stirling with Ross yoke is a two-cylinder stirling engine (not positioned at 90°, but at 0°) connected with a special yoke. The engine configuration/yoke setup was invented by Andy Ross (engineer)[disambiguation needed].[39]

The Franchot engine is a double acting engine invented by ‘Franchot’ in the nineteenth century. A double acting engine is one where both sides of the piston are acted upon by the pressure of the working fluid. One of the simplest forms of a double acting machine, the Franchot engine consists of two pistons and two cylinders and acts like two separate alpha machines. In the Franchot engine, each piston acts in two gas phases, which makes more efficient use of the mechanical components than a single acting alpha machine. However, a disadvantage of this machine is that one connecting rod must have a sliding seal at the hot side of the engine, which is a difficult task when dealing with high pressures and high temperatures[citation needed].


The idealised Stirling cycle consists of four thermodynamic processes acting on the working fluid:

  1. IsothermalExpansion. The expansion-space and associated heat exchanger are maintained at a constant high temperature, and the gas undergoes near-isothermal expansion absorbing heat from the hot source.
  2. Constant-Volume (known as isovolumetric or isochoric) heat-removal. The gas is passed through the regenerator, where it cools, transferring heat to the regenerator for use in the next cycle.
  3. IsothermalCompression. The compression space and associated heat exchanger are maintained at a constant low temperature so the gas undergoes near-isothermal compression rejecting heat to the cold sink
  4. Constant-Volume (known as isovolumetric or isochoric) heat-addition. The gas passes back through the regenerator where it recovers much of the heat transferred in 2, heating up on its way to the expansion space.

Theoretical thermal efficiency equals that of the hypothetical Carnot cycle – i.e. the highest efficiency attainable by any heat engine. However, though it is useful for illustrating general principles, the text book cycle is a long way from representing what is actually going on inside a practical Stirling engine and should only be regarded as a starting point for analysis. In fact it has been argued that its indiscriminate use in many standard books on engineering thermodynamics has done a disservice to the study of Stirling engines in general.[49][50]

Other real-world issues reduce the efficiency of actual engines, due to limits of convective heat transfer, and viscous flow (friction). There are also practical mechanical considerations, for instance a simple kinematic linkage may be favoured over a more complex mechanism needed to replicate the idealized cycle, and limitations imposed by available materials such as non-ideal properties of the working gas, thermal conductivity, tensile strength, creep, rupture strength, and melting point. A question that often arises is whether the ideal cycle with isothermal expansion and compression is in fact the correct ideal cycle to apply to the Stirling engine. Professor C. J. Rallis has pointed out that it is very difficult to imagine any condition where the expansion and compression spaces may approach isothermal behavior and it is far more realistic to imagine these spaces as adiabatic.[51] An ideal analysis where the expansion and compression spaces are taken to be adiabatic with isothermal heat exchangers and perfect regeneration was analyzed by Rallis and presented as a better ideal yardstick for Stirling machinery. He called this cycle the ‘pseudo-Stirling cycle’ or ‘ideal adiabatic Stirling cycle’. An important consequence of this ideal cycle is that it does not predict Carnot efficiency. A further conclusion of this ideal cycle is that maximum efficiencies are found at lower compression ratios, a characteristic observed in real machines. In an independent work, T. Finkelstein also assumed adiabatic expansion and compression spaces in his analysis of Stirling machinery [52]


If you want to study how to build your own Stirling engine you can start this so called “Can Stirling Engine” and then build a bigger one:




So there you have some solution against these greedy monster electricity corporations. Just think about it. If everyone has this kind of engine in basement you can produce electricity when the main grid is down, and if you have Solar power available you can use that to heat up and start up your engine! Great stuff!

“Truth never hurts the teller.”
ROBERT BROWNING, Fifine at the Fair

The Mystery of the Missing Pyramidion of Khufu

I have many times wondered, that when you watch the Great Pyramid you notice that there is something missing on the top, the cap stone. Where is it and what was the purpose of it. Here’s a little article about that stone:

The Mystery of the Missing Pyramidion of Khufu


One of the mysteries of Giza is the missing pyramidion or capstone of the Great Pyramid of Khufu. Since modern recorded history, the Great Pyramid has been topless, with several meters of its apex missing. Egyptologists have assumed that the pyramid was originally capped by a small pyramid called a pyramidion. If that is true, then what happened to it, and what could it have looked like?

It is possible, indeed highly probable, that the great Egyptian architect and royal vizier, Imhotep, was still alive when Khufu planned his pyramid. Imhotep was the High Priest of Heliopolis, where the sacred Benben Stone was kept, and on its shape and symbolism was modeled the gilded capstones of pyramid called ‘Benben-t’. Could Imhotep have advised Khufu to conceal the Benben in his pyramid? But where?

This article below is culled from a discussion in Appendix 1 of my latest book, co-written with Thomas Brophy, Ph.D., Imhotep The African: Architect of the Cosmos (Disinformation Books).

In October 1900 the guards of the Egyptian Antiquities Organisation (EAO) in the area of Dashur, a site on the western desert that is some 20 kilometers south of modern Cairo, were attacked by a group of armed brigands. A few days later, Gaston Maspero, the head of the EAO went to inspect the site. It was then that he was taken to see an amazing and rather unique artifacts that had been found embedded in the sand near a pyramid of the 12th Dynasty belonging to the pharaoh Amenemhet III. There, sticking partially out of the sand, was a magnificent pyramidion made of black granite. Maspero could hardly believe his eyes at the amazing preservation of this 4000 years old artifacts which, in his excitement, he described as “polished like a mirror”.  The pyramid, which measured 1.85 meters at the base and had a height of 1.40 meters, was decorated with wonderful inscriptions. On one face was a winged solar-disk flanked by two ureus (sacred cobras), and under the solar-disk were two large eyes. Under the eyes were three lutes with a large sun disk underneath. On each side of the sun-disk were the royal cartouches bearing the names of Amennemhet III, and  at the base of the triangular face were two lines of hieroglyphs. In an article published in the Annales Du Services Des Antiquités in 1902, Maspero gave this translation:

“May the face of the king be opened so that he may see the Lord of the Horizon when he crosses the sky; may he cause the king to rise as a god, lord of eternity and indestructible… Horakhti has said I have given to the king of Upper and Lower Egypt the beautiful horizon who takes the inheritance of the two lands…so that you may unit with the horizon…the horizon has said that you rest upon it, which pleases me.”

In view of the mention of Horakhti (Horus of the Horizon) who was regarded as the symbol of the rising sun in the east, Maspero concluded that this face with the winged sun-disk was the East face of the pyramidion. Maspero did not give a full translation of the other threes faces which also bore two lines of inscriptions each, but nonetheless adds that “the invocation is similarly addressed on the South face to Anubis; on the West face to Ptah-Sokar-Osiris; on the North face to Sah-Orion.”

The same view was later expressed by the American Egyptologist James Henry Breasted in 1912. Breasted wrote:

“On the side which undoubtedly faced the east appears a winged sun-disk, surmounted by a pair of eyes, beneath which are the words ‘Beauty of the Sun’, the eyes of course indicate the idea of beholding which is to be understood with the words, ‘beauty of the sun’. Below is an inscription of two lines beginning: ‘The face of king Amenemhet III is opened, that he may behold the Lord of the Horizon when he sails across the sky’…”

In 1964 the American Egyptologist Alexander Piankoff, renowed for his translation of the Pyramid Texts, gave the translation of part of the East face which mentioned the constellation of Orion:

The sou) of Amenemhet is higher than the heights of  Orion, and it unites itself with the Duat…”

Piankoff interpreted the above by writing that “here, as in the Pyramid Texts, Orion is the visible manifestation of Osiris who, like this constellation, descends to the Netherworld (Duat) and then appears again in the sky.”

In 1946 the British Egyptologist Sir I.E.S. Edwards, an authority on the pyramids of Egypt, gave his own translation of the East face:

“May the face of the king be opened so that he may see the Lord of the Horizon [i.e., Harakhte] when he crosses the sky; may he cause the king to shine as a god, lord of eternity and indestructible, (Harakhte replies that he has) given the beautiful horizon to the king”

Today Egyptologists agree that the pyramids of ancient Egypt represented the dead kings. Indeed, the pyramidwas regarded as an actually personification of the dead king.  Indeed the name given to the pyramids show clearly that these monuments were considered to be the afterlife form of the king himself. According to A. Piankoff, for example,

“The embalmed body of the king lay in or under the pyramid, which together with its entire compound, was considered his body.”

Yet Egyptologists also agree that in the Pyramid Texts, the afterlife form of the king is said to be a ‘star’ in the sky.

This, then, may explain why in the case of at least three pyramids, the monuments were given stellar names while also personifying the dead king, such as “Djedefre is a Star in the Sky”, “Nebka is a Star” and the pyramid of Djoser being called “Horus is the Star at the head of the Sky”.  All this leads us to conclude that the pyramidion on top of the king’s pyramid was regarded as the stellar-transfigured king or his star-soul. It is only when we view it as such that the inscriptions on the East side of the pyramidion of Amenemhet III makes any sense: “May the face of the king be opened so that he may see the Lord of the Horizon…”

But two questions now must be also considered. For if indeed the pyramidion represented the form of the king as a star, then what could possibly have given the ancient Egyptians the idea that a star had the physical shape of a ‘pyramid” and, furthermore, that it was composed of very hard “black stone” such as black granite?

Most Egyptologists agree that the shape of pyramids was inspired by the Benben Stone that was venerated in the ‘Mansion Of The Phoenix’ at the city of Heliopolis. Many scholars claim that the Benben was symbolic of the sun. In 1912 the eminent American Egyptologist James H. Breasted noted the similarity of the word ‘Benben’ with the word ‘Benbenet’ –the pyramid-shaped apex of an obelisk– and concluded that “an obelisk is simply a pyramid upon a lofty base which has become a shaft… the obelisk, as is commonly known, is a symbol sacred to the Sun-god…[it followed that] the king was buried under the very symbol of the Sun-god which stood in the holy of holies in the Sun-temple at Heliopolis” This conclusion by an authority of the caliber of Breasted was quickly embraced by other authorities such as Sir I.E.S. Edwards who also proposed that the occasional sight of an immaterial triangle formed by the sun’s rays striking downwards through low clouds at sunset could have been the inspiration for the Benben’s shape “and its architectural derivative, the true Pyramid”.  Edwards quoted several passages from the Pyramid Texts that seem to support this idea:

“I have laid down for myself this sunshine of yours as a stairway under my feet…”

“May the sky make the sunlight strong for you, may you rise up to the sky…”

According to Edwards “the temptation to regard the true Pyramid as a material representation of the sun’s rays and consequently as a means whereby the dead king could ascend to heaven seems irresistible.” Yet it is also true that the Pyramid Texts give many other means for the dead pharaoh to ascend to the sky: on a ladder ( “The king climbs to the sky on a ladder”); on the wind (“the king is bound for the sky on the wind” (pyr. 309); on a storm-cloud/thunderbolt (“The king is a flame before the wind…there is brought to him a way of ascent to the sky”); on a hailstorm (“the hailstorms of the sky have taken me”); on a reed-floa: (“the reed-floats of the sky are set in place for me…I am ferried over to the eastern sky”); by climbing a rope (“set the rope aright, cross the Milky Way…”); on the thighs of Isis: (I ascend [to the sky] upon the thighs of Isis” ).  So the Pyramid Texts are full of such metaphors, and thus the idea of the dead king climbing on the sun’s rays is only another to describe poetically the celestial ascent, and cannot be taken as evidence for the shape of the Benben or the pyramid. There is, however, in the Pyramid Texts a passage which directly equate the actual pyramid to the king and Osiris: “This king is Osiris, this pyramid of the king is Osiris, this construction of his is Osiris, betake yourself to it, do not be far from it in its name of pyramid…”.

In the rebirth rituals of the Pyramid Texts the dead king’s name is compounded with the name of Osiris, showing that after his death the king became “an Osiris”. Now Osiris in the Pyramid Texts was a star-god whose soul was identified to the constellation of Orion:

“Behold Osiris has come as Orion”

“O king, you are this Great Star, the companion of Orion”

Could, therefore, the Benben Stone, and its derivatives the pyramid and the pyramidion, be regarded as ‘star’ symbols?  It is true that the ‘Mansion Of The Phoenix’ in which was kept the Benben Stone was in the City of Iunu, later called Heliopolis (City of the Sun) by the Greeks, an association of the Benben with the sun does not necessarily follow. Why, one must wonder, was a pyramid or conical shaped stone would be regarded as a manifestation of the sun when in all ancient Egyptian art the sun is represented as a disk or circle? Egyptologists have argued that the reason for this was because the Benben Stone may also have been a symbol of the so-called “Primeval Mound” in the Pyramid Texts on which it is said that the first sunrise took place, implying that the shape of the pyramid was inspired by the idea of a sacred mound. Edwards rejects this idea by pointing out that the Primeval Mound was linked to the much older Mastaba tomb structure of the first three Dynasties, which was not pyramid-shaped but rather in the form of a rectangular slab. Clearly, another more plausible explanation for the pyramidal or conical shape of the Benben Stone must be sought.

It is known that a sacred pillar was worshipped at Heliopolis before the Benben. The phallic symbolism of a pillar needs no emphasis; and its association to the “phallus” of Atum is implied in the Pyramid Texts

“Atum is he who once came into being, who masturbated in Heliopolis. He took his phallus in his grasp that he might create orgasm by means of it…”

“O Atum, the rising sun (-khoprer, the sacred beetle), you became high on the heights, , you rose as the Benben Stone in the Mansion Of The Phoenix in On…”

The Egyptologist Henry Frankfort made the plausible suggestion that the Benben was placed atop the sacred pillar, giving rise to the idea of the obelisk with a Benbenet/pyramidion at its top, and that the pyramidion may thus represent the “semen” or “seed” being ejaculated from a cosmic phallus associated to Atum. There are several well-known depiction of the Earth-God Geb (the son of Atum) laying down with an exaggeratedly long phallus pointing to the Sky-Goddess Nut, the “mother of Osiris”:

“…make the womb of Nut pregnant with the seed of the spirit which is in her”

“Pressure is in your womb, O Nut, through the seed of the god which is in you; it is I [the Osiris-king] who am the seed of the god which is in you…”

“…the king is an imperishable star, son of the sky-goddess Nut…”

“The king was fashioned by his father Atum…”

“O Atum, this king comes to you, an imperishable spirit (star)…your son comes to you, this king comes to you”

In my opinion, then, the idea of a pillar surging skywards and on top of which was the Benben Stone, is highly symbolic of a giant phallus offering its “star-seed” to the sky-goddess in order to gestate it in her womb and cause the departed king to be “reborn”. Bearing this in mind, it comes as no surprise to discover that the word “Benben” is often given the meaning to “copulate” or “seed a womb” confirmed by the hieroglyphic sign of an erect phallus shown ejaculating semen. Indeed, there are several words in the ancient Egyptian language that use the root word ‘Ben’ to describe sexual acts. Also in the famous Turin Papyrus which depicts sexual scenes, one image shows a beautiful naked woman inserting the tip of a pyramidion into her vagina, making clear that such objects were regarded phallis or capable of seeding a womb. The stellar aspect of these “seeding” rituals are depicted in the following passages of the Pyramid texts, where the departed king is somehow put into the womb of the sky-goddess (the ‘sarcophagus’) and is gestated there to eventually be reborn as star:

“The king is your seed”

“…the king comes to you, O mother of the king, he has come to Nut, that you may bring the sky to the king and hang the stars for him…”

“the sky-Goddess Nut conceives you with Orion…”

“Recitation by Nut, the greatly beneficent: the king is my eldest son who splits open my womb…”

“…O King, you are this Great Star, the companion of Orion…the sky has borne you with Orion…” (pyr.882-3).

“The King is a star brilliant…the King appears as a star…”

“You [Nut] have set this King as an imperishable Star who is in you…”

“The King is a star”

“I [the king] am a soul …a star of gold…”

“I [the king] am a star which illumines the sky…”

As we have said earlier in this article, the names of several monumental pyramids were given stellar names such as ‘Djedefre is a sehed  star’; ‘Nebka is a star’. Also the ‘ba’ i.e. soul, of the dead king is clearly to be regarded as a s ‘star’ in the Pyramid Texts, which indirectly also gives a stellar name to many other pyramids such as ‘The soul (ba) of Sahure gleams’ and ‘Neferirkare has become a soul (ba)’. The compounding of the pharaoh’s name with his pyramid implies, if not proves, that the monument (or perhaps mostly the pyramidion at the top) is to be regarded as the transfigured form of the king into a star-soul.

Still, why did the ancient Egyptians imagine that the star were shaped like a pyramid or a cone?

In antiquity the sight of “shooting stars” or  “falling stars” is, of course, a meteorite. Meteorites are debris from outer space, mostly from broken up asteroids, which enter the gravitational pull of the Earth and fall down to the ground –as opposed to meteors which completely burn up during atmospheric transit. Meteorites are either iron-meteorites (about 90% iron and 10-12% nickel) or stone meteorites. The largest that survive impact are the iron-meteorites for obvious reasons. Most meteorites are very small, but occasionally a large meteorite enters our atmosphere. If it is very large  it will retain most of its cosmic velocity, thus compressing the air in front of it as it approaches the ground, causing it to explode with dramatic effect. But if the meteorite is of medium size, somewhere between 10 and 60 tons, its cosmic velocity is slowed down by the earth’s atmosphere, causing the meteorite to eventually free fall and hit the ground almost intact. Some of these medium size meteorites retain their orientation as they speed through the earth’s atmosphere, which causes only the front part to melt and flow toward the rear. The result is a iron object having the shape of a rough pyramid or cone.

Bearing this in mind, I also discovered that the ancient Egyptians believed that iron actually came from heaven, which is clearly an allusion to the meteoritic origin of iron before the Iron Age. In other ancient cultures there were many sacred stones such as the Benben which were believed to have ‘fallen from heaven’. The Ephesians (see Acts xix-35 of the Bible) worshipped such a stone in the temple of Diana “that symbol of her which fell from heaven”. In Delphi a stone shaped like a cone was believed to have come from the sky. A conical iron-meteorite was also worshiped by the Phrygian in the 7th century BC. There was also the famous conical “black stone” called Elagalabus that was worshipped in Emessa. A modern example of such “stone from heaven” is the  black stone of the the Ka’aba in Mecca in Saudi Arabia which is a meteorite that was recovered in antiquity. The British Egyptologist Gerald Wainwright has shown how iron in early Egypt was obtained from iron-meteorites. The ancient Egyptian word for iron was ‘bja’ which was called “material of which heaven was made”. Significantly, in the Pyramid Texts we are told that,

“The king’s bones are iron and the king’s members are the imperishable stars…”

“I [the king] am pure, I take to myself my iron bones…my imperishable limbs are in the womb of Nut”

“…my bones are iron and my limbs are the imperishable stars”.

It is not very hard to see that chunks of meteoritic iron, which generally have a luster black appearance, were classified by the ancient Egyptians along with other hard black or dark stones such as diorite, basalt and granite. To a people unfamiliar with iron and its chemical properties, the resemblance of basalt to a rough iron meteorite can be uncanny. Not surprising then, black basalt was called ‘black iron’ (bja kam), suggesting that basalt, and possibly black granite, were associated to meteoritic iron, and consequently to the ‘bones’ of star-gods. Most pyramidions that were once placed on the top of pyramids were made of dark granite, such as the fine example of Amenemhet III. Also the hieroglyphic sign for ‘pyramid’ was a pyramid often with a yellow pyramidion, suggesting that the latter may have been covered with gold leaf. An inscription on the pyramid of queen Udjebten (6th Dynasty) speaks of the golden capstone on her pyramid. In the Pyramid Texts we read,

“O King, raise yourself upon your iron bones and golden members, for this body of yours belongs to a god… may your flesh be born to life and may your life be more than the life of the stars in their season of life…”

“I [the king] row Ra when traversing the sky, even I a star of gold…”

“…be a soul like a living star”.

Could the idea of the pyramidal shape of a “living star” made from golden flesh and black iron bones and shining high up in the sky, have been the reason for the pyramidion made of black granite covered in gold leaf and raised high up the pyramid? Was this how the lost pyramidion of Khufu looked like? And what could have happened to it? Could it have been removed by the priests of Heliopolis, under the orders of Imhotep, from its original sanctuary and hidden somewhere? Where?

In a ‘secret chamber’ inside the Great Pyramid?

Only time will tell…

10 Signs The Global Elite Are Losing Control

Here’s intersting post about how elite is losing their power:

Eric Blair
Activist Post

Karma is coming for the elite in a big way. As the Powers That Be head toward a devastating defeat in their war plans for Syria, signs are emerging that their rule over humanity is rapidly diminishing.

Over the last decade the global elite have been on a mad dash to consolidate power over the world. It’s always been their plan like some evil villain in a comic book, but after 9/11 the plan went into overdrive and then turbo charged during the financial crisis of 2008.

Yet it’s doomed to fail because humans are meant to be guided by their own free will, not controlled like livestock. The more the elite try to control humanity, the more entropy occurs. Entropy, for those who don’t know, is the lack of order or predictability; a gradual decline into disorder.

Although the elite still enjoy a huge wealth advantage over the masses, they are now resigned to behaving like tyrants to maintain control. This, in turn, exposes their dark side which has been cleverly concealed for ages. Not anymore.

People are waking up in droves, at least as fast as the elite can build their full-spectrum prison matrix.  Let them try.  To paraphrase Victor Hugo, “No army can stop an idea whose time has come.”

Here are ten signs that the elite are losing control over the people:

1. Official lies no longer effective: The lies they tell simply don’t work anymore. There was a time when official lies, especially about war and peace, were believed. Because, after all, how evil would it be to lie about such things? Generally people want to believe they are being told the truth when life and death is at stake. The boy who cried wolf has cried one too many times. Even if they told the truth at this point, very few would believe them.

2. No confidence in politics: US politicians have a paltry approval rating. The trust in government is at all-time lows here and around the world. Mainstream polls show only 10% of the public has confidence in Congress. In other words, 90% don’t believe in them to be competent to govern.

Watch this Town Hall exchange below where a man threatens US Senator John McCain with arrest for treason to his face. This would have never happened just a year or two ago:


3. No confidence in media: The most recent polls show that 77% of the population no longer trusts corporate TV news. Is it any wonder why the establishment media failed to sell the lies about the alleged Syria chemical event?  With all their monopoly might over the airwaves, they can no longer claim that black is white simply because officialdom says so.

4. Bankers rejected: Hungary recently became the first country to follow Iceland’s lead by shedding international bankers (IMF) and is considering pursuing prosecution of past prime ministers who enslaved the people with debt.


Look for this trend to continue even if nations decide to default to break free.

5. Vatican abruptly cleaning up its act: Under the previous Pope, Pope Benedict, scandals erupted from the Vatican ranging from covering up pedophile priests to money laundering and fraud. Benedict, in an unprecedented move, abruptly retired to make way for a seemingly much more likable Pope Francis. Pope Francis by all measures is working furiously to reclaim the church’s peaceful and humble reputation. Whether this is genuine or a PR move, it’s telling that the church was forced into such a drastic turnaround to save itself from losing all credibility.

6. Mutiny among soldiers: Finally. Soldiers, who are outlawed from making political statements, are steadily speaking out against US military adventurism. As Einstein famously said “The pioneers of a warless world are the young men (and women) who refuse military service.”

7. Militarized police state: One of the darkest signs that the elite are losing their grip on power is the construction of the militarized police state specifically trained to combat domestic civil unrest. Local cops with tanks and other combat gear are working with Feds at Fusion centers, active Army units are on American soil for the first time in history, the NSA spy grid is being used by the IRS and DEA, and the elimination of due process for Americans under the NDAA are just some of the tyrannical moves made to secure the elite criminals from public backlash. They’re clearly scared, and they should be given what they’ve done to the American people and the Constitution.


8. Serious secession movements everywhere: A state seceding from a larger political entity used to be an ultra-fringe concept, until now. In America, secession movements are winning over the public in parts of Colorado and California. In Europe, serious secession movements are happening in Spain and Scotland, as well as several EU nations flirting with the idea of dropping out of the euro. Decentralization = Entropy!

9. GMO food being rejected everywhere: Control the food and you control the people. True in theory, but much more difficult in practice. GMO leaders like Monsanto are being exposed. All of their economic and political strength cannot defeat the spread of knowledge about the dangers of pesticide-soaked Frankenfoods. GMO fields are being burned in protest in America and around the world, informed nations continue to reject their products, and labeling laws are gaining traction.

10. Cannabis liberation: Many reading this will think marijuana legalization is a superficial development. However, it is a major signpost that the elite’s grip is fading.  Enormous resources have been spent to keep cannabis illegal. Cannabis has been a powerful medicine for physical, mental, and spiritual health throughout the ages. This single plant represents a huge threat to the power structures and their industries, hence its seemingly senseless illegality. The approaching global reversal of the tyrannical policy of prohibition is the first of many concessions to come.

Read more from Eric Blair Here