The Falsification of History: Our Distorted Reality by John Hamer Page A

long list of letters after my name, accompanied by a position at one of the world’s premier seats of education, so it naturally follows in the mind-sets of these people (and indeed most people per se, who have been conditioned to believe that educational qualifications equal intelligence) that it must be my logic that is faulty.

    When French was confronted on his illogical views by a well-known so-called ‘conspiracy’ researcher and author, French told him that there was ‘no evidence’ for what this researcher was saying in his many well-researched books on the topic of a global conspiracy to impose a ‘New World Order’.   The response to this by the said researcher was to ask if he had ever read any of his books (which by the way contain an absolute mountain of evidence to support his assertions) and was told ‘no’.   How very typical.   These people are not interested in circumstantial proof or evidence if it goes against their set-in-stone mind-sets or presents a viewpoint that contradicts their unassailable opinions and yet they will openly accuse their detractors of exactly the same tactics.

    In my experience, people who refuse to look at both sides of the argument have no high moral ground or even credibility at all.   I have met dozens of these people over the years, people who have only ever seen the view of reality as propounded by the mainstream and yet dismiss one’s own position as being ‘ludicrous’ or ‘crazy’ despite the fact that I am the one who has looked at two sides of the coin in order to formulate my opinion and not simply just one side, as they have.

    There is a famous organisation known as the ‘Sceptics Society’ devoted to ‘promoting scientific scepticism and resisting the spread of pseudoscience, superstition and irrational beliefs’.   It is an assumption among most people that it is ‘healthy’ to be sceptical, but I believe that to be untrue, if not downright misleading.   It is healthy to question and research controversial issues, but that is not the same as scepticism whose adherents maintain a fixed position and then filter-out all evidence that does not fit that stance.   They will always attempt to find another means of explaining away something that challenges their immutable beliefs and it is almost irrelevant whether or not that argument is illogical or contradicted by the evidence or not, just so long as it allows them a ‘get-out clause’ to maintain their fixed view.

    In any case, we should ask who decides what is ‘pseudoscience, superstition and irrational beliefs’?   The answer is that they themselves do, of course and so we find ourselves back within the circular logic-trap again.   They devote themselves to protecting the so-called scientific and societal norms and received wisdom, to which they cling with almost touching loyalty and vociferously attack anyone who dares to question them and/or put forward an alternative viewpoint, no matter how well-researched or pertinent it may be.

    “That’s what a closed mind does for you.   You don’t research to discover anew; you research to confirm your current beliefs.   Most of academia is another religion, another belief system repelling all boarders.   Academia often condemns and ridicules religion when it is one [itself] and operates in the same way.   What unites all religions?   Concrete minds.”   David Icke, geopolitical researcher
    Unfortunately, all of academia has almost completely abandoned the core principles of good science in their disturbing quest to make money at all costs for their corporate paymasters, ultimately the Elite bloodlines.   Rather than asking pertinent questions of nature and relating and accurately interpreting the answers provided by the data, these ‘scientists’ plot the desired outcome based on pre-determined criteria and then defend it at all costs, even if this necessitates the misrepresentation, falsification and distortion of data and thus