Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Announcing the SUMMER MAGIC 1985 boxed set ⚡Revisit the Grateful Dead's high-octane "Twenty Years So Far" anniversary tour in this 20 CD set, featuring seven previously unreleased concerts that find the band recapturing their unique spiritual fusion of communal energy, musical improvisation, and psychedelic style. 'Twas a hot summer,...

GratefulDead's profile picture

Grateful Dead

211,109 subscribers

19,393 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

15 Yorum

Phishead9 profil fotoğrafı
Phishead92 ay önce

Finally a soundboard of the GOAT shakedown street 6.30.1985!!

William Thomas profil fotoğrafı
William Thomas2 ay önce

Grateful Dead radio

William Thomas profil fotoğrafı
William Thomas2 ay önce

Sugar magnolia

William Thomas profil fotoğrafı
William Thomas2 ay önce

Shakedown Street Sugar magnolia

Daniel Nolan profil fotoğrafı
Daniel Nolan2 ay önce

Sweet!

Pumpkin Butt profil fotoğrafı
Pumpkin Butt2 ay önce

I hope someone can answer me here for this. Is the high definition download in ALAC format ? I only use Apple for music.

World Mystery Watch Theater profil fotoğrafı
World Mystery Watch Theater2 ay önce

Any Atmos?

Danny Dasani profil fotoğrafı
Danny Dasani2 ay önce

Will these be on the Play Dead service?

Rob Callen profil fotoğrafı
Rob Callen2 ay önce

💙⚡❤️🌹

Van Lingle Mungo profil fotoğrafı
Van Lingle Mungo2 ay önce

Da P 59 please. No 90s horseshit please.

Dave Thompson profil fotoğrafı
Dave Thompson2 ay önce

Loved that tour! I just wish I still had a CD player.

Turk484 profil fotoğrafı
Turk4842 ay önce

I think this is the first box set from the "weird sounding" tapes from the mid-80's. Plinko Brent and overall distinctive "muddiness" or whatever that is. Some heaters in there iirc - Hershey and MPP, plus.

kara frances profil fotoğrafı
kara frances1 ay önce

bummed

AJS profil fotoğrafı
AJS2 ay önce

Need 10/26!

PuttinInWerk profil fotoğrafı
PuttinInWerk2 ay önce

FUCK YES! 🤘 I can’t get enough 80’s ❤️Brent⚡️Jerry💙

Benzer Videolar

A deeper look into the ‘Summer Magic 1985’ boxed set 🌈 Arriving on September 18th, this new 20CD boxed set is filled with spellbinding moments from the Dead’s ‘Twenty Years So Far’ tour, celebrating the magical and spiritual fusion of communal energy, musical improvisation, and psychedelic style, and the transformative ‘concert alchemy’ of that summer. All performances were recorded by the band’s longtime sound engineer Dan Healy and mastered by GRAMMY® Award-winning engineer David Glasser at Airshow Mastering. Multidisciplinary artist Marcos Alvarado, known for incorporating alchemical symbolism in his surreal figurative drawings, introduces an array of new characters through striking original artwork that draws inspiration from classic alchemical illuminations. The 96-page book included in the set features new essays by Nicholas G. Meriwether and David Lemieux, photos, and more original artwork from Alvarado, with clever design and bonus items adding a sense of continued transformation and discovery that honors the Grateful Dead’s enduring legacy. ‘Summer Magic 1985’ is available to pre-order now exclusively on
1:23

A deeper look into the ‘Summer Magic 1985’ boxed set 🌈 Arriving on September 18th, this new 20CD boxed set is filled with spellbinding moments from the Dead’s ‘Twenty Years So Far’ tour, celebrating the magical and spiritual fusion of communal energy, musical improvisation, and psychedelic style, and the transformative ‘concert alchemy’ of that summer. All performances were recorded by the band’s longtime sound engineer Dan Healy and mastered by GRAMMY® Award-winning engineer David Glasser at Airshow Mastering. Multidisciplinary artist Marcos Alvarado, known for incorporating alchemical symbolism in his surreal figurative drawings, introduces an array of new characters through striking original artwork that draws inspiration from classic alchemical illuminations. The 96-page book included in the set features new essays by Nicholas G. Meriwether and David Lemieux, photos, and more original artwork from Alvarado, with clever design and bonus items adding a sense of continued transformation and discovery that honors the Grateful Dead’s enduring legacy. ‘Summer Magic 1985’ is available to pre-order now exclusively on

Grateful Dead

12,598 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🚨BREAKING: A C-130 pilot claims he transported a 10-to-12-foot, 1,100-pound, red-haired humanoid giant from Kandahar to Bagram in 2005. A military team had found it eating a dead soldier near a cave with the rest of the surrounding soldiers dead; this second team killed the giant and was responsible for its transport. The body was airlifted out of Afghanistan in a large palette and taken to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base where it may still be held today. Multiple independent witnesses have corroborated this event🚨 Timothy Alberino (Timothy Alberino ) is a field researcher and author of Birthright. He spent 10 years in Peru, made multiple research expeditions to Sardinia and Afghanistan-adjacent source networks, and has spent decades synthesizing eyewitness testimony from abductees, military personnel, and indigenous communities across multiple continents. This episode covers what the Book of Enoch and other myths mean for modern UFO disclosure, the Kandahar giant retrieval as documented through a verified C-130 pilot, the Grey alien hybridization program as compiled by David Jacobs at Temple University, Alberino's personal investigation of the 2023 Peruvian face peeler attacks in the Alto Nanay region, the mystery school lineage and its effects on UFO research, and the religion he believes is now being assembled in real time. 1. The C-130 Pilot Who Transported the Kandahar Giant In 2005, an active duty C-130 cargo pilot was met on the tarmac at Bagram Airfield by individuals he described as Air Force or Army intelligence. He had never been intercepted on the tarmac before. They told him: this never happened, no pictures, don't talk about it. His cargo was a nine-foot pallet. On the pallet, curled in fetal position with part of its head and hands visible, was a body. Red hair. Pale white skin. Six fingers on each hand. Six toes on each foot. The loadmaster weighed everything before loading. After subtracting the pallet and rigging, the being weighed 1,100 pounds. The soldiers standing around it were comparing boot sizes to its feet. It was transferred to a base in Qatar. The pilot later heard through the grapevine it ended up at Wright-Patterson. Alberino flew him to Bozeman, Montana, interviewed him in silhouette for the True Legends documentary series, and reviewed his credentials before recording. 2. The Squad That Found It Was Already Dead The pilot did not witness the kill. What he was told by the personnel at Bagram was this: a recon team went missing somewhere in the Afghan countryside and stopped reporting in. A second team was dispatched to find them. They found the first team at or near the entrance to a cave. Every man was dead. The giant was eating one of them. The second team killed it. L.A. Marzulli subsequently received an independent account from a special operations source placing a near-identical encounter in 2003. In that version, the giant skewered one of the soldiers with a spear. Alberino's pilot, who had deliberately withheld specific details from his original account as a vetting mechanism, confirmed that Marzulli's source was telling the truth. Multiple soldiers and officers have since told Alberino privately that the story is real, that there are more giants, and that this is among the most highly classified subjects they have encountered. 3. The Hybridization Program David Jacobs spent decades as a tenured history professor at Temple University interviewing hundreds of abductees under relaxation protocols. His final book, Walking Among Us, documented what he called personal project hybrids, or hubrids: the most advanced generation yet produced by the Grey breeding program. These are human-alien hybrids now indistinguishable from ordinary humans. They retain the telepathic capabilities of the Greys. Their loyalty is entirely to the Greys. Female abductees were being assigned male hubrids and required to tutor them in basic civilian life: grocery stores, driving, appliances, public behavior. Jacobs described the hubrids as psychopathic. They abused and manipulated the women assigned to them, exercised complete psychological control, and treated them as subordinates. Jacobs named the endgame plainly: planetary acquisition by stealth. 4. Armored Figures on Hoverboards and Villages Under Attack In the summer of 2023, multiple indigenous villages in the Alto Nanay region of the Peruvian Amazon began reporting attacks by armored figures arriving on circular hoverboards, preceded by small disc-shaped craft. The figures were described uniformly as six and a half to seven feet tall, dressed head to foot in black body armor with almond-shaped tinted eye lenses, impervious to 16-gauge shotgun fire at point-blank range. Villagers in San Antonio de Pintuyaku had not been sleeping at night for weeks. They were running armed patrols. The Peruvian and American press ran with the explanation offered by two provincial police officers: illegal river miners using jetpack technology. Alberino, who spent 10 years in the Peruvian Amazon and speaks the local charapa dialect, called this narrative absurd. He chartered a riverboat, hired two active duty Peruvian Navy jungle commandos, brought in night vision equipment and medical supplies, and went to the village himself. 5. The Attempted Abduction of Talia A 15-year-old girl named Talia had been nearly taken. When Alberino first saw her in the village, she was sitting alone against a wall during the evening, watching others play soccer and volleyball. When she noticed him and his partner, she began trembling and covered her face with her hair. The following morning, her father brought her outside to speak. She trembled again and cried before saying a word. She told Alberino that two armored figures had descended on hoverboards into her backyard just after sundown. One landed behind her and grabbed her from behind. The other grabbed her feet. They carried her behind a chicken coop hovering off the ground. They injected something into her nose that caused disorientation. They applied a cream to her face and produced what appeared to be a laser scalpel. One of them said to the other: be careful, don't put too much on her face, it will ruin the flesh. She pushed up the helmet of the figure behind her. He let go to pull it down. She screamed. Her brother and neighbors arrived within seconds. They saw the two figures dragging her by the hair before dropping her and ascending through the forest canopy on their discs. Alberino filmed the laser incision scar on Talia's face. 6. Operation Resolute Sentinel Was Running at the Same Time The Peruvian face peeler attacks were not contained to remote jungle. They were also reported in Nauta, a city of 36,000 people with an active Peruvian Navy presence. This alone dismantles the miner hypothesis. Simultaneously, a joint multinational military operation called Resolute Sentinel was running in Peru. Participants included the U.S. Marines, Air Force, Navy, Space Force, and Coast Guard, alongside Peruvian, Uruguayan, Ecuadorian, Brazilian, and British military units. Alberino does not know what Resolute Sentinel was covering. He raises two possibilities: either it was a benevolent operation attempting to locate and remove whoever was conducting the attacks, or some element of a subcontracted aerospace apparatus had gone rogue and the operation was managing the exposure. 7. Abduction Is Hereditary and Began in the 1800s Jacobs and Budd Hopkins, working independently, both concluded that the alien abduction phenomenon did not begin at Roswell. It began in the mid to late 1800s. Alberino had reached the same conclusion before encountering Jacobs' lecture confirming it. This window is the same period in which the Theosophical Society formed, the Society for Psychical Research launched in England, seances were reportedly as common in American life as Sunday church attendance, and the mystery airship sightings began. Abduction runs in families without exception. Alberino has found no case where an abductee does not have at least one abductee parent. The program is exponential by design. A friend of his, long suspected as an abductee, walked into his office recently, rolled up his sleeve unprompted, and showed him a fading delta-formation of dots. He said: they came and got me. 8. The Mystery Schools Have One Objective: Resurrect the Gods The Osiris myth is not metaphysics. It is operational documentation. Isis represents the adepts of the mystery school. Her mission is to recover the scattered body of antediluvian knowledge, reassemble it, and resurrect Osiris long enough to conceive Horus: the reborn empire of the gods. Alberino traces this lineage from the Phoenicians, through Freemasonry, through the NASA mission catalog, whose named programs and landing sites map directly onto the Greek, Egyptian, and Mesopotamian pantheons. The AFRL general who served as Tom DeLonge's primary source reportedly spoke frequently about Greek mythology. A WikiLeaks email queried the resurrection tomb of Gilgamesh. The objective, Alberino argues, has not changed. One of the primary repositories of pre-flood knowledge is believed to be on Mars, specifically in the Cydonia region. The aspiration to reach Mars is ancient. 9. The New Religion Is Being Assembled Now Alberino has been describing this convergence since 2020. It combines two streams. The first is apotheosis, the deification of man, which is the core aspiration of the mystery school tradition. The second is the literal return of the gods in craft. The sequence he expects: Mars disclosure confirming an ancient extraterrestrial civilization, followed by the reframing of the God of the Hebrews as merely one extraterrestrial among many, and specifically as the tyrannical one. Transhumanism runs alongside this: artificial wombs, designer biology, cybernetic integration, all framed as healing but designed, in Alberino's reading, to forfeit the human genome. Ray Kurzweil, asked if he believes in God, said: not yet. Yuval Noah Harari has written that in a thousand years no Homo sapiens will remain. Alberino does not read these as predictions. He reads them as a program. Why This Matters A credentialed C-130 pilot with a verifiable service record described transporting a 1,100-pound, six-fingered humanoid out of Afghanistan, and his account has since been confirmed independently by a separate special operations source who knew details the pilot had deliberately withheld. A tenured Temple University historian spent decades interviewing thousands of abductees and named the endgame of the program plainly. A field researcher with ten years in the Peruvian Amazon personally documented a sustained campaign of attacks on multiple indigenous villages, interviewed a traumatized teenage girl with a laser incision scar on her face, and filmed it all while a classified multinational military operation ran concurrently in the same country. These are not isolated stories. Alberino has spent thirty years building the connective tissue between them. The question he leaves open is not whether any of this is real. It is who is managing all of it, and toward what end. Full episode is live now.
2:27

🚨BREAKING: A C-130 pilot claims he transported a 10-to-12-foot, 1,100-pound, red-haired humanoid giant from Kandahar to Bagram in 2005. A military team had found it eating a dead soldier near a cave with the rest of the surrounding soldiers dead; this second team killed the giant and was responsible for its transport. The body was airlifted out of Afghanistan in a large palette and taken to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base where it may still be held today. Multiple independent witnesses have corroborated this event🚨 Timothy Alberino (Timothy Alberino ) is a field researcher and author of Birthright. He spent 10 years in Peru, made multiple research expeditions to Sardinia and Afghanistan-adjacent source networks, and has spent decades synthesizing eyewitness testimony from abductees, military personnel, and indigenous communities across multiple continents. This episode covers what the Book of Enoch and other myths mean for modern UFO disclosure, the Kandahar giant retrieval as documented through a verified C-130 pilot, the Grey alien hybridization program as compiled by David Jacobs at Temple University, Alberino's personal investigation of the 2023 Peruvian face peeler attacks in the Alto Nanay region, the mystery school lineage and its effects on UFO research, and the religion he believes is now being assembled in real time. 1. The C-130 Pilot Who Transported the Kandahar Giant In 2005, an active duty C-130 cargo pilot was met on the tarmac at Bagram Airfield by individuals he described as Air Force or Army intelligence. He had never been intercepted on the tarmac before. They told him: this never happened, no pictures, don't talk about it. His cargo was a nine-foot pallet. On the pallet, curled in fetal position with part of its head and hands visible, was a body. Red hair. Pale white skin. Six fingers on each hand. Six toes on each foot. The loadmaster weighed everything before loading. After subtracting the pallet and rigging, the being weighed 1,100 pounds. The soldiers standing around it were comparing boot sizes to its feet. It was transferred to a base in Qatar. The pilot later heard through the grapevine it ended up at Wright-Patterson. Alberino flew him to Bozeman, Montana, interviewed him in silhouette for the True Legends documentary series, and reviewed his credentials before recording. 2. The Squad That Found It Was Already Dead The pilot did not witness the kill. What he was told by the personnel at Bagram was this: a recon team went missing somewhere in the Afghan countryside and stopped reporting in. A second team was dispatched to find them. They found the first team at or near the entrance to a cave. Every man was dead. The giant was eating one of them. The second team killed it. L.A. Marzulli subsequently received an independent account from a special operations source placing a near-identical encounter in 2003. In that version, the giant skewered one of the soldiers with a spear. Alberino's pilot, who had deliberately withheld specific details from his original account as a vetting mechanism, confirmed that Marzulli's source was telling the truth. Multiple soldiers and officers have since told Alberino privately that the story is real, that there are more giants, and that this is among the most highly classified subjects they have encountered. 3. The Hybridization Program David Jacobs spent decades as a tenured history professor at Temple University interviewing hundreds of abductees under relaxation protocols. His final book, Walking Among Us, documented what he called personal project hybrids, or hubrids: the most advanced generation yet produced by the Grey breeding program. These are human-alien hybrids now indistinguishable from ordinary humans. They retain the telepathic capabilities of the Greys. Their loyalty is entirely to the Greys. Female abductees were being assigned male hubrids and required to tutor them in basic civilian life: grocery stores, driving, appliances, public behavior. Jacobs described the hubrids as psychopathic. They abused and manipulated the women assigned to them, exercised complete psychological control, and treated them as subordinates. Jacobs named the endgame plainly: planetary acquisition by stealth. 4. Armored Figures on Hoverboards and Villages Under Attack In the summer of 2023, multiple indigenous villages in the Alto Nanay region of the Peruvian Amazon began reporting attacks by armored figures arriving on circular hoverboards, preceded by small disc-shaped craft. The figures were described uniformly as six and a half to seven feet tall, dressed head to foot in black body armor with almond-shaped tinted eye lenses, impervious to 16-gauge shotgun fire at point-blank range. Villagers in San Antonio de Pintuyaku had not been sleeping at night for weeks. They were running armed patrols. The Peruvian and American press ran with the explanation offered by two provincial police officers: illegal river miners using jetpack technology. Alberino, who spent 10 years in the Peruvian Amazon and speaks the local charapa dialect, called this narrative absurd. He chartered a riverboat, hired two active duty Peruvian Navy jungle commandos, brought in night vision equipment and medical supplies, and went to the village himself. 5. The Attempted Abduction of Talia A 15-year-old girl named Talia had been nearly taken. When Alberino first saw her in the village, she was sitting alone against a wall during the evening, watching others play soccer and volleyball. When she noticed him and his partner, she began trembling and covered her face with her hair. The following morning, her father brought her outside to speak. She trembled again and cried before saying a word. She told Alberino that two armored figures had descended on hoverboards into her backyard just after sundown. One landed behind her and grabbed her from behind. The other grabbed her feet. They carried her behind a chicken coop hovering off the ground. They injected something into her nose that caused disorientation. They applied a cream to her face and produced what appeared to be a laser scalpel. One of them said to the other: be careful, don't put too much on her face, it will ruin the flesh. She pushed up the helmet of the figure behind her. He let go to pull it down. She screamed. Her brother and neighbors arrived within seconds. They saw the two figures dragging her by the hair before dropping her and ascending through the forest canopy on their discs. Alberino filmed the laser incision scar on Talia's face. 6. Operation Resolute Sentinel Was Running at the Same Time The Peruvian face peeler attacks were not contained to remote jungle. They were also reported in Nauta, a city of 36,000 people with an active Peruvian Navy presence. This alone dismantles the miner hypothesis. Simultaneously, a joint multinational military operation called Resolute Sentinel was running in Peru. Participants included the U.S. Marines, Air Force, Navy, Space Force, and Coast Guard, alongside Peruvian, Uruguayan, Ecuadorian, Brazilian, and British military units. Alberino does not know what Resolute Sentinel was covering. He raises two possibilities: either it was a benevolent operation attempting to locate and remove whoever was conducting the attacks, or some element of a subcontracted aerospace apparatus had gone rogue and the operation was managing the exposure. 7. Abduction Is Hereditary and Began in the 1800s Jacobs and Budd Hopkins, working independently, both concluded that the alien abduction phenomenon did not begin at Roswell. It began in the mid to late 1800s. Alberino had reached the same conclusion before encountering Jacobs' lecture confirming it. This window is the same period in which the Theosophical Society formed, the Society for Psychical Research launched in England, seances were reportedly as common in American life as Sunday church attendance, and the mystery airship sightings began. Abduction runs in families without exception. Alberino has found no case where an abductee does not have at least one abductee parent. The program is exponential by design. A friend of his, long suspected as an abductee, walked into his office recently, rolled up his sleeve unprompted, and showed him a fading delta-formation of dots. He said: they came and got me. 8. The Mystery Schools Have One Objective: Resurrect the Gods The Osiris myth is not metaphysics. It is operational documentation. Isis represents the adepts of the mystery school. Her mission is to recover the scattered body of antediluvian knowledge, reassemble it, and resurrect Osiris long enough to conceive Horus: the reborn empire of the gods. Alberino traces this lineage from the Phoenicians, through Freemasonry, through the NASA mission catalog, whose named programs and landing sites map directly onto the Greek, Egyptian, and Mesopotamian pantheons. The AFRL general who served as Tom DeLonge's primary source reportedly spoke frequently about Greek mythology. A WikiLeaks email queried the resurrection tomb of Gilgamesh. The objective, Alberino argues, has not changed. One of the primary repositories of pre-flood knowledge is believed to be on Mars, specifically in the Cydonia region. The aspiration to reach Mars is ancient. 9. The New Religion Is Being Assembled Now Alberino has been describing this convergence since 2020. It combines two streams. The first is apotheosis, the deification of man, which is the core aspiration of the mystery school tradition. The second is the literal return of the gods in craft. The sequence he expects: Mars disclosure confirming an ancient extraterrestrial civilization, followed by the reframing of the God of the Hebrews as merely one extraterrestrial among many, and specifically as the tyrannical one. Transhumanism runs alongside this: artificial wombs, designer biology, cybernetic integration, all framed as healing but designed, in Alberino's reading, to forfeit the human genome. Ray Kurzweil, asked if he believes in God, said: not yet. Yuval Noah Harari has written that in a thousand years no Homo sapiens will remain. Alberino does not read these as predictions. He reads them as a program. Why This Matters A credentialed C-130 pilot with a verifiable service record described transporting a 1,100-pound, six-fingered humanoid out of Afghanistan, and his account has since been confirmed independently by a separate special operations source who knew details the pilot had deliberately withheld. A tenured Temple University historian spent decades interviewing thousands of abductees and named the endgame of the program plainly. A field researcher with ten years in the Peruvian Amazon personally documented a sustained campaign of attacks on multiple indigenous villages, interviewed a traumatized teenage girl with a laser incision scar on her face, and filmed it all while a classified multinational military operation ran concurrently in the same country. These are not isolated stories. Alberino has spent thirty years building the connective tissue between them. The question he leaves open is not whether any of this is real. It is who is managing all of it, and toward what end. Full episode is live now.

Jesse Michels

1,059,573 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

If someone tells you Mercedes "Level 3" DrivePilot is more advanced than Tesla FSD, they are either clueless or lying to you. Mercedes DrivePilot: 1. Only works on certain models of the top end S class and EQS with special hardware. So only some versions of their most expensive car support it, or almost no cars. By contrast any Tesla built since October 2016 can run FSD. 2. Only works on pre-mapped highways in California or Nevada. By contrast Tesla FSD works on any road, highway or city streets across North America (and soon, Europe and China) 3. You must be in a traffic jam on the highway traveling under 40 miles per hour. By contrast FSD allows you to go up to 85 miles per hour. 4. You must have a vehicle right in front of you to follow, if they pull too far ahead you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD does not require a lead vehicle. 5. You must have clear lane markings — if they are faded you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD works without any lane markings. 6. Only works in good weather — if it's rainy, foggy, sun shining directly at car, etc you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD works in a wide range of inclement weather conditions (but of course has limits too) 7. Only works in the daytime. Does not turn on at night. By contrast FSD works 24 hours a day. 8. You have to click ok to accept the first time you turn it on per drive. By contrast FSD just turns on without requiring you to click ok 9. DrivePilot still has a driver monitoring system that will beep at you / ask you to take over if you do anything that is not allowed (like leaning too far back) 10. You may be asked to take over at any moment for any reason and need to be ready to do so within 10 seconds. 11. If you don't take control, the vehicle will come to a dead stop in the middle of the highway 12. DrivePilot cannot handle interchanges or change lanes. By contrast FSD can handle lane changes and interchanges completely automatically. Mercedes can do lane changes in Level 2 mode, but in Level 3 mode you need to do them yourself. You will always need to pay attention to make sure you don't miss the exit 13. "Don't think of it as a fully automated do everything for you sytem. It's more like Level 2 enhanced, but enhanced in a really impressive way" 14. Relies on HD mapping to function. Mercedes needs to build and maintain these maps or the system will not work. The system does not work anywhere the maps don't go, such as city streets. 15. System is so reliant on maps to tell the car where to drive that they have to account for things like continental drift 16. When the system asks you to take over, you're sent back into manual driving mode — all lane keeping is turned off 17. Once it goes out of its operating conditions, you are liable again. So, for example, if someone changes lanes and there's no longer a lead car in front of you the system suddenly turns off, stops in the middle of the highway, and you're liable again "so it's always good to pay attention, even when these systems are on" (so what is the benefit exactly?) 18. Because mapping is so expensive to maintain, it costs $2,500 a year. By contrast FSD costs only $1,200 a year. It does so much more for less than half the price, and works on any Tesla. 19. No way to retrofit DrivePilot onto a car that doesn't have the LIDAR etc 20. "I came away from my time with DrivePilot a bit mystified. It's clear that developing this system was a complicated endeavor, with all the added sensors and complexity and while it was on I have to say it worked pretty flawlessly. But with the operating conditions being so narrow, I couldn't shake the thought of 'is this all worth it?' from my head. Even trying to film this video was difficult, as the vehicle would hand control back just as we were getting going especially with that low 40 mph speed threshold. And if I were paying $2,500 a year to use this system and it wouldn't stay on, I would find that pretty frustrating" It is crazy and sad that people are being so misinformed about important safety technologies that could save or change their lives. If anyone tells you this system is more advanced than anything else out there, they are either a moron or a liar.
5:58

If someone tells you Mercedes "Level 3" DrivePilot is more advanced than Tesla FSD, they are either clueless or lying to you. Mercedes DrivePilot: 1. Only works on certain models of the top end S class and EQS with special hardware. So only some versions of their most expensive car support it, or almost no cars. By contrast any Tesla built since October 2016 can run FSD. 2. Only works on pre-mapped highways in California or Nevada. By contrast Tesla FSD works on any road, highway or city streets across North America (and soon, Europe and China) 3. You must be in a traffic jam on the highway traveling under 40 miles per hour. By contrast FSD allows you to go up to 85 miles per hour. 4. You must have a vehicle right in front of you to follow, if they pull too far ahead you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD does not require a lead vehicle. 5. You must have clear lane markings — if they are faded you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD works without any lane markings. 6. Only works in good weather — if it's rainy, foggy, sun shining directly at car, etc you will be asked to take over. By contrast FSD works in a wide range of inclement weather conditions (but of course has limits too) 7. Only works in the daytime. Does not turn on at night. By contrast FSD works 24 hours a day. 8. You have to click ok to accept the first time you turn it on per drive. By contrast FSD just turns on without requiring you to click ok 9. DrivePilot still has a driver monitoring system that will beep at you / ask you to take over if you do anything that is not allowed (like leaning too far back) 10. You may be asked to take over at any moment for any reason and need to be ready to do so within 10 seconds. 11. If you don't take control, the vehicle will come to a dead stop in the middle of the highway 12. DrivePilot cannot handle interchanges or change lanes. By contrast FSD can handle lane changes and interchanges completely automatically. Mercedes can do lane changes in Level 2 mode, but in Level 3 mode you need to do them yourself. You will always need to pay attention to make sure you don't miss the exit 13. "Don't think of it as a fully automated do everything for you sytem. It's more like Level 2 enhanced, but enhanced in a really impressive way" 14. Relies on HD mapping to function. Mercedes needs to build and maintain these maps or the system will not work. The system does not work anywhere the maps don't go, such as city streets. 15. System is so reliant on maps to tell the car where to drive that they have to account for things like continental drift 16. When the system asks you to take over, you're sent back into manual driving mode — all lane keeping is turned off 17. Once it goes out of its operating conditions, you are liable again. So, for example, if someone changes lanes and there's no longer a lead car in front of you the system suddenly turns off, stops in the middle of the highway, and you're liable again "so it's always good to pay attention, even when these systems are on" (so what is the benefit exactly?) 18. Because mapping is so expensive to maintain, it costs $2,500 a year. By contrast FSD costs only $1,200 a year. It does so much more for less than half the price, and works on any Tesla. 19. No way to retrofit DrivePilot onto a car that doesn't have the LIDAR etc 20. "I came away from my time with DrivePilot a bit mystified. It's clear that developing this system was a complicated endeavor, with all the added sensors and complexity and while it was on I have to say it worked pretty flawlessly. But with the operating conditions being so narrow, I couldn't shake the thought of 'is this all worth it?' from my head. Even trying to film this video was difficult, as the vehicle would hand control back just as we were getting going especially with that low 40 mph speed threshold. And if I were paying $2,500 a year to use this system and it wouldn't stay on, I would find that pretty frustrating" It is crazy and sad that people are being so misinformed about important safety technologies that could save or change their lives. If anyone tells you this system is more advanced than anything else out there, they are either a moron or a liar.

Whole Mars Catalog

678,121 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

The US is well advanced in preparations for a war on China. Here are 28 steps taken. Bookmark this, and please add others. 1. BATAN: The US quietly carried out a major operation last summer to deepen the harbour on the island of Batan, south of Taiwan—so that warships can use it on their way to the China coast. 2. LANDING STRIPS: A US team has compiled a list of long flat areas in Asia that can be used as aircraft runways for use in launching fighter jets to bomb China. 3. PRACTICE RUNS: US troops held exercises specifically preparing for an invasion of China last year with armies from Japan, Australia, and Indonesia. 4. TAIWAN TRAINING: The US military landed troops in Taiwan secretly to train soldiers---and they are now learning how to attack amphibious vehicles. 5. TROOPS IN PLACE. More than 100,000 US troops have already been assigned to what the US calls the "Pacific Theatre". 6. SHIFTING SUBS: The US has told Australia that its subs may not be delivered in time (or ever) because all attack subs will be needed close to China. 7. FLOATING ARMS DEPOTS: The US admits it has placed vast amounts of ready-to-grab weapons in places such as Taiwan. 8. DIVISION OF LABOR: Europe has already been told to replace all US troops and weapons in their own parts of the world with local equivalents, so that US troops and hardware can head to China. 9. FIRST WAVE: The first wave of fighters will be Taiwanese using the "proxy war" model to keep actual Americans at a safe distance, as specified in US strategy books. 10. DISINFORMATION: The Pentagon has set up a division called Perception Management to tell the public that China is an expansionist military power, not the USA. Mainstream media is hiding the fact that Taiwan is legally part of China and instead reporting that China "claims" Taiwan. 11. CONFLICT CREATION: The Philippines under new pro-Washington leader President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has been working hard already for months to create conflicts in the seas. (Video includes specialist analysis of a ship-to-ship dispute.) 12. NINE BASES: Large sums of money have been paid in the Philippines so that it now hosts NINE China-facing bases. 13. OKINAWA: The US has quietly abandoned its 12-yr-old plan to reduce the number of troops in Okinawa. 14. CAMP SCHWAB: Nearby, a landfill bigger than the entire Pentagon will house US helicopters and Osprey rotating-rotor airplanes for use in attacking China. 15. PNG PROBLEMS: The US flew in to PNG to buy the use of three airports, two ports and one naval base, and are renovating a military base on the island to the north. 16. COMMS JAM: Electronic magnetic pulse weapons will be employed to jam communications in China. 17. VANISHING GPS: The US will weaponize the GPS system to force the Chinese to use their much younger homemade system. 18. BANKING ON TROUBLE: The world's main money transfer system, called SWIFT, will be instructed to allow no money into or out of China. 19. DOORSTEP DELIVERY: Standing by in the Pacific right now are special ships [image supplied] which beach themselves on enemy land to discharge 900 tons of attack forces. 20. DANGER FROM THE SKIES: Army paratroopers have recently been training in Hawaii for a mission that would see them ready to land in rural areas outside Chinese cities. 21. STAR WARS: The Pentagon has a special division working specifically on how to attack China from space. 22. SEAPATHS BLOCKED: The US plans a blockade of everything that could go in and out of China by sea by using what they call The First Island Chain and The Second Island Chain—basically friends that Washington has bought and paid for. 23. LAWFARE: Acts will be passed in the US demanding that the whole world boycotts China, exactly as the US did with Russia three years ago. 24. BLACK OPS: The US has been quietly penetrating parts of China with trained troublemakers, as they did in Hong Kong. These people will trigger street battles which the western media will portray as "pro-democracy" protests. CIA and US army intelligence groups will conduct "black ops" inside China in a bid to create chaos. 25. DRONES: The US has a long record of successfully using killer drones. The new generation ones, still under wraps, have AI built in so they can kill people without human help. 26. AIRSTRIKES: The US is currently letting its F-35 pilots practice dropping "bunker buster" bombs on Yemen—these bombs can go through 20 feet of solid rock to kill people hiding in shelters—and are preparing to target China. 27. CASH THEFT: Political leaders in the US and the UK and European nations have already said that they consider themselves entitled to freeze, take, and spend the assets of countries they judge to have behaved aggressively. 28. TECH BROS: The Pentagon has a division that monitors all major tech companies to pull them as needed into the war effort—and they won't be given a choice. .
9:55

The US is well advanced in preparations for a war on China. Here are 28 steps taken. Bookmark this, and please add others. 1. BATAN: The US quietly carried out a major operation last summer to deepen the harbour on the island of Batan, south of Taiwan—so that warships can use it on their way to the China coast. 2. LANDING STRIPS: A US team has compiled a list of long flat areas in Asia that can be used as aircraft runways for use in launching fighter jets to bomb China. 3. PRACTICE RUNS: US troops held exercises specifically preparing for an invasion of China last year with armies from Japan, Australia, and Indonesia. 4. TAIWAN TRAINING: The US military landed troops in Taiwan secretly to train soldiers---and they are now learning how to attack amphibious vehicles. 5. TROOPS IN PLACE. More than 100,000 US troops have already been assigned to what the US calls the "Pacific Theatre". 6. SHIFTING SUBS: The US has told Australia that its subs may not be delivered in time (or ever) because all attack subs will be needed close to China. 7. FLOATING ARMS DEPOTS: The US admits it has placed vast amounts of ready-to-grab weapons in places such as Taiwan. 8. DIVISION OF LABOR: Europe has already been told to replace all US troops and weapons in their own parts of the world with local equivalents, so that US troops and hardware can head to China. 9. FIRST WAVE: The first wave of fighters will be Taiwanese using the "proxy war" model to keep actual Americans at a safe distance, as specified in US strategy books. 10. DISINFORMATION: The Pentagon has set up a division called Perception Management to tell the public that China is an expansionist military power, not the USA. Mainstream media is hiding the fact that Taiwan is legally part of China and instead reporting that China "claims" Taiwan. 11. CONFLICT CREATION: The Philippines under new pro-Washington leader President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has been working hard already for months to create conflicts in the seas. (Video includes specialist analysis of a ship-to-ship dispute.) 12. NINE BASES: Large sums of money have been paid in the Philippines so that it now hosts NINE China-facing bases. 13. OKINAWA: The US has quietly abandoned its 12-yr-old plan to reduce the number of troops in Okinawa. 14. CAMP SCHWAB: Nearby, a landfill bigger than the entire Pentagon will house US helicopters and Osprey rotating-rotor airplanes for use in attacking China. 15. PNG PROBLEMS: The US flew in to PNG to buy the use of three airports, two ports and one naval base, and are renovating a military base on the island to the north. 16. COMMS JAM: Electronic magnetic pulse weapons will be employed to jam communications in China. 17. VANISHING GPS: The US will weaponize the GPS system to force the Chinese to use their much younger homemade system. 18. BANKING ON TROUBLE: The world's main money transfer system, called SWIFT, will be instructed to allow no money into or out of China. 19. DOORSTEP DELIVERY: Standing by in the Pacific right now are special ships [image supplied] which beach themselves on enemy land to discharge 900 tons of attack forces. 20. DANGER FROM THE SKIES: Army paratroopers have recently been training in Hawaii for a mission that would see them ready to land in rural areas outside Chinese cities. 21. STAR WARS: The Pentagon has a special division working specifically on how to attack China from space. 22. SEAPATHS BLOCKED: The US plans a blockade of everything that could go in and out of China by sea by using what they call The First Island Chain and The Second Island Chain—basically friends that Washington has bought and paid for. 23. LAWFARE: Acts will be passed in the US demanding that the whole world boycotts China, exactly as the US did with Russia three years ago. 24. BLACK OPS: The US has been quietly penetrating parts of China with trained troublemakers, as they did in Hong Kong. These people will trigger street battles which the western media will portray as "pro-democracy" protests. CIA and US army intelligence groups will conduct "black ops" inside China in a bid to create chaos. 25. DRONES: The US has a long record of successfully using killer drones. The new generation ones, still under wraps, have AI built in so they can kill people without human help. 26. AIRSTRIKES: The US is currently letting its F-35 pilots practice dropping "bunker buster" bombs on Yemen—these bombs can go through 20 feet of solid rock to kill people hiding in shelters—and are preparing to target China. 27. CASH THEFT: Political leaders in the US and the UK and European nations have already said that they consider themselves entitled to freeze, take, and spend the assets of countries they judge to have behaved aggressively. 28. TECH BROS: The Pentagon has a division that monitors all major tech companies to pull them as needed into the war effort—and they won't be given a choice. .

Nury Vittachi

715,443 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

*** Test Your 9/11 Knowledge: The Explosive Evidence at the 3 WTC Towers The 50 Questions NIST Should Have Asked 20 Years Ago! WTC Building 7 Free-fall 1. How is it possible that 47-story Building 7 fell suddenly, symmetrically in free-fall acceleration, without any resistance from any of its 81 columns? 2. Why did NIST deny its free-fall for 7 years, only to be proven wrong and be forced to officially admit that it did collapse in free-fall? Symmetry 3. How, if Building 7 was damaged asymmetrically in the north-east corner on floor twelve, as per the NIST report, could it fall symmetrically downward? Shouldn’t the building have tilted toward its damaged side – and not fall straight down through the path of what was the greatest resistance? Fires 4. How could a few, small, and scattered ordinary office fires have brought this Type-1 fire-protected steel-frame skyscraper down, when several dozen examples of much hotter, much larger, and longer-lasting fires have never in history brought down such a building? 5. How could normal office fires take out all the columns in the building sequentially floor by floor, in 7 seconds? 6. Why did NIST claim that the fires were still burning, up until the time of the collapse, when the photos show that they were burnt out more than an hour before the collapse? 7. Why aren’t all the firefighters concerned, in the wake of the NIST report during the last 24 years, that such ordinary fightable fires can now bring skyscrapers down on top of them, and on top of the public who are told to “defend in place” in the building (and not obstruct access by firefighters)? 8. Why are many of these same firefighters calling for a new investigation of the NIST report itself? Controlled Demolition 9. Since the collapse of Building 7 looks exactly like a controlled demolition, why did NIST avoid any serious consideration of this hypothesis? 10. How could a 40,000-ton moment-resisting and X-braced structural steel frame collapse like a house of cards in 7 seconds, with most of its columns and beams severed – one from another? 11. Why does WTC 7 have all of the key features of typical controlled demolition, and none of the features of collapse by fire? Explosions 12. Why didn’t NIST include in its report on WTC 7 the half-dozen witnesses of explosions prior to its collapse, and even claim that there were no witnesses? 13. What could have caused an elevator cab to be “blown 30 feet out of its hoistway,” as Deputy Director of NY-Office of Emergency Management, Richard Rotanz, reported at Noon, when the building didn’t collapse for another 5 hours. 14. What caused Barry Jennings and Michael Hess to be injured by explosions and subsequently trapped in the building before either Twin Tower collapsed? Foreknowledge 15. Why did Fire Chief Nick Visconti declare, “We’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down!”? 16. How could Fire Chief Hayden’s engineer declare, upon being asked, “how long until the building comes down?” – then accurately state, “In its current state you have about 5 hours,” when no steel-frame fire-protected high-rise had ever come down due to fire alone? 17. Why did construction workers, while walking away from Building 7 and upon hearing an explosion from the building, look straight into the CNN camera saying, “You hear that? Keep your eye on that building. That thing’s coming down. The building is about to blow up, flame and debris coming down”? 18. Why did former Air Force medic Kevin McPadden hear a “3-2-1” countdown on the radio, and subsequently hear explosions before Building 7 collapsed? 19. How could the BBC have announced, live on TV, the collapse of WTC 7 20 minutes before it collapsed? 20. Why did CNN announce, 7 hours early, the 10:45 AM collapse of a 50-story building (obviously referring to Building 7)? Expert Statements 21. Why have more than 3,600 Architects & Engineers signed onto the petition at demanding a new 9/11 WTC investigation? 22. Why are dozens of structural engineers making statements such as: “A localized failure in a steel-framed building like WTC 7 cannot cause a catastrophic collapse like a house of cards, without a simultaneous and patterned loss of several of its columns at key locations within the building”? 23. Why did the top European controlled demolition expert declare: “That is controlled demolition. It’s been imploded. It’s a hired job. A team of experts did this? 24. Why did top forensic structural engineer, Prof. Leroy Hulsey from the University of Alaska, following a 4-year study of WTC 7, declare: “The collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse, as claimed by NIST. Extreme Heat Molten Metal 25. What does it mean that FEMA, in its 2002 Report, including a metallurgical examination of the WTC 7 steel, revealed “a phenomenon never before observed in building fires….a liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel...” Why did NIST eliminate this metallurgical report from their final report? 26. Did Fire Protection Engineer Jonathan Barnett know, when he said, “steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated,” that it takes 4,000°F to evaporate steel? And that jet fuel and office fires don’t even rise to a third of that temperature? 27. Why is there bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the crab claw excavators in the WTC pit? And out of the South Tower just minutes before its collapse. 28. Why did the first responders in the pit report, “you get down in the pile, and you see molten steel – flowing down the channel rails, like lava from a volcano”? Did they know that it takes 3,000°F to melt steel, and that office fires and jet fuel can only achieve half of this temperature? 29. What can explain the well-documented 3,000°F temperatures that are well-documented in the WTC Twin Towers collapse aftermath? Why is there evidence of ignited thermite found by so many first responders in the WTC pile? Previously Molten Iron Microspheres 30. What does it mean that the US Geological Survey and RJ Lee Group independently documented billions of previously molten iron-rich microspheres in ALL of the WTC dust samples? Where would the required 3,000°F come from? Could the ignited thermite have created those molten iron microspheres? 31. Why is bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the South Tower just minutes prior to its collapse? 32. What explains the 2009 peer-reviewed findings from the Niels Harrit research team of dual-layered red-gray chips of nano-thermite in all the independently-collected dust samples they analyzed? Why do they ignite at the same temperature as military grade “super-thermite”? Why do they produce molten iron-rich microspheres when ignited? 33. What does it mean that Harrit’s international research team found that the “red layer of the red/gray chips in all of their WTC dust samples is active unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material”? The Twin Towers Official Explanation 34. How can the official explanation of the Twin Towers’ collapse be true (that an intact top section drove down the rest of the building after weakening of some of the structural steel in the impact zone) when this top section had already been destroyed in the first 3 seconds of the collapse (telescoping in on itself) and so was not even available to drive anything down to the ground? NIST claims that the top part of the building drove the rest of the building down to the ground. Why then do none of the photos or videos show such a top part driving anything down? And why didn’t that top “pile driver” drive down the 800-foot-tall group of columns standing for 6 seconds after the overall collapse? 35. Why did Zdenek Bazant, in his calculations for his controversial paper submitted to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics on 9/13/01( only two days after 9/11) use twice the actual mass of the upper section of the North Tower above the impact floors and only one third of the actual column strength of the larger building section beneath it in his support for NIST collapse theory? a. Why is this paper still today the key theoretical basis of NIST’s column failure theory? 36. Why does the destruction of the towers look more like a volcanic eruption (than a straight-down gravitational collapse) with upward and outward arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks, freely flying solid molten objects trailing thick white smoke clouds? Witnesses of Explosions 37. Why are there 156 First Responder witnesses of explosions – seeing, hearing, and feeling explosions – many of them BEFORE the towers ever came down? 38. Why did NIST claim that there were “no witnesses of explosions” when there were as many as 200 publicly recorded testimonies – many before the collapse? What could explain Fire Chief Frank Cruthers’ testimony that, “… an explosion… appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay, before you could see the beginning of the collapse”? 39. Why did 36 reporters on the day of 9/11 report the WTC destruction as an explosion-based event, most of them actual witnesses of explosions? a. Why did the mainstream national media change the story the next day from explosion-based collapses to “fire-induced collapses”? 40. Why did the FBI, NYPD, and FDNY on the day of 9/11 all state that they suspected that explosives were used to bring down the towers, but change their story in the following week to fire-induced collapse? Seismic Evidence 41. Why did the Richter Scale recordings from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events for both towers, more than a dozen seconds before the planes hit either tower – corroborating the explosive testimony of William Rodriguez and others of massive explosions in the basement prior to the plane hitting the buildings? 42. Why did the seismic evidence from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events, in the North Tower, 5 seconds before the heaviest debris from each tower struck the ground? And in the South Tower, 7 seconds before any debris struck the ground? Wouldn’t this seismic evidence corroborate the testimony of the first responders that saw, heard, and/or felt explosions before the towers fell? 43. Why did at least 3 of the tripod-mounted cameras (two on the ground and one on the rooftop) “shake” 3 to 10 seconds before each of the towers fell? Would the camera evidence corroborate the seismic evidence and the first responder's explosive testimony? Explosive Evidence 44. Since the damage from the planes and fires was so asymmetrical, why was the destruction itself so precisely symmetrical – all the way down each face of each tower? Why do the videos show precise rows of individual explosions progressing down the towers – floor by floor? 45. Why do we see in the videos isolated pin-point explosive ejections occurring 20, 40, and even 60 stories down below the downward-traveling zone of destruction in each tower? Descent Profile and Speed 46. Why did the top sections of each tower descend suddenly, smoothly, down with no stoppage or “jolt” upon impact with the cold, hard, intact steel columns below the floors of the plane impacts? 47. How was it possible that the top section of each Tower descended without slowing at all, but instead accelerated, as if 80,000 tons of steel beneath wasn’t even there? What happened to the steel? Lateral Ejection of Steel 48. Why do we see in the videos the lateral ejection out of both of the Towers of hundreds of freely flying structural steel sections each weighing 4 to 8 tons, at 80mph, landing up to 600 feet in every direction, impaling all of the surrounding skyscrapers? Why are they trailing thick white smoke clouds when steel is not flammable in office fires, or under jet fuel conditions? Could this be due to the other byproduct of thermite – aluminum oxide ash? 49. Since FEMA officially documented a 1200-foot diameter zone of flying, fallen, and impaled structural steel beyond the footprints of both Towers, how could that steel, which comprised 1/3 of the weight of the falling section of each building, have still been available to crush the lower part as NIST claimed? Missing Floors 50. Since there were 110 concrete floors, each an acre in size, and since they were not stacked up in pile of “pancakes” at the bottom, and since a third of the WTC dust in the 3” thick blanket across Lower Manhattan from river to river is powdered concrete, then how could the concrete floors (also 1/3 of the weight of each Tower) be available to crush the building below? 51. What extreme-high temperature could have reduced 90,000 tons of concrete in each Tower back to its original aggregate, sand, and cement powder? Demolition Access 52. How could the perpetrators have gained access to the Towers to plant high energy explosives and incendiaries? Could a massive fireproofing upgrade project in the months and years prior to 9/11 have provided access to the underside of the floor systems to apply sprayed-on nano-thermite? Is it a coincidence that the WTC fireproofing upgrades occurred mostly on the floors that were hit by the planes on 9/11? Could the largest elevator modernization in the world in the 9 months prior to 9/11 have provided access to the core columns and beams? Is it just a coincidence that Ace Elevator employees were pulled out of the Towers on 9/11 for “union meeting”? Destruction of Evidence 53. Why was 99% of the WTC structural steel crime scene evidence loaded onto barges starting just 2 weeks after 9/11 and shipped to China for recycling before structural engineers and metallurgists could get their hands on it to do a proper forensic investigation? We encougage you to ask these questions of your elected representatives and the media. We address most of these questions in our presentations and podcast and radio interviews. So get is in front of them! Who do you know that might interview RichardGage911 about the explosive destruction of the 3 World Trade Center Skyscrapers on 9/11?
0:22

*** Test Your 9/11 Knowledge: The Explosive Evidence at the 3 WTC Towers The 50 Questions NIST Should Have Asked 20 Years Ago! WTC Building 7 Free-fall 1. How is it possible that 47-story Building 7 fell suddenly, symmetrically in free-fall acceleration, without any resistance from any of its 81 columns? 2. Why did NIST deny its free-fall for 7 years, only to be proven wrong and be forced to officially admit that it did collapse in free-fall? Symmetry 3. How, if Building 7 was damaged asymmetrically in the north-east corner on floor twelve, as per the NIST report, could it fall symmetrically downward? Shouldn’t the building have tilted toward its damaged side – and not fall straight down through the path of what was the greatest resistance? Fires 4. How could a few, small, and scattered ordinary office fires have brought this Type-1 fire-protected steel-frame skyscraper down, when several dozen examples of much hotter, much larger, and longer-lasting fires have never in history brought down such a building? 5. How could normal office fires take out all the columns in the building sequentially floor by floor, in 7 seconds? 6. Why did NIST claim that the fires were still burning, up until the time of the collapse, when the photos show that they were burnt out more than an hour before the collapse? 7. Why aren’t all the firefighters concerned, in the wake of the NIST report during the last 24 years, that such ordinary fightable fires can now bring skyscrapers down on top of them, and on top of the public who are told to “defend in place” in the building (and not obstruct access by firefighters)? 8. Why are many of these same firefighters calling for a new investigation of the NIST report itself? Controlled Demolition 9. Since the collapse of Building 7 looks exactly like a controlled demolition, why did NIST avoid any serious consideration of this hypothesis? 10. How could a 40,000-ton moment-resisting and X-braced structural steel frame collapse like a house of cards in 7 seconds, with most of its columns and beams severed – one from another? 11. Why does WTC 7 have all of the key features of typical controlled demolition, and none of the features of collapse by fire? Explosions 12. Why didn’t NIST include in its report on WTC 7 the half-dozen witnesses of explosions prior to its collapse, and even claim that there were no witnesses? 13. What could have caused an elevator cab to be “blown 30 feet out of its hoistway,” as Deputy Director of NY-Office of Emergency Management, Richard Rotanz, reported at Noon, when the building didn’t collapse for another 5 hours. 14. What caused Barry Jennings and Michael Hess to be injured by explosions and subsequently trapped in the building before either Twin Tower collapsed? Foreknowledge 15. Why did Fire Chief Nick Visconti declare, “We’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down!”? 16. How could Fire Chief Hayden’s engineer declare, upon being asked, “how long until the building comes down?” – then accurately state, “In its current state you have about 5 hours,” when no steel-frame fire-protected high-rise had ever come down due to fire alone? 17. Why did construction workers, while walking away from Building 7 and upon hearing an explosion from the building, look straight into the CNN camera saying, “You hear that? Keep your eye on that building. That thing’s coming down. The building is about to blow up, flame and debris coming down”? 18. Why did former Air Force medic Kevin McPadden hear a “3-2-1” countdown on the radio, and subsequently hear explosions before Building 7 collapsed? 19. How could the BBC have announced, live on TV, the collapse of WTC 7 20 minutes before it collapsed? 20. Why did CNN announce, 7 hours early, the 10:45 AM collapse of a 50-story building (obviously referring to Building 7)? Expert Statements 21. Why have more than 3,600 Architects & Engineers signed onto the petition at demanding a new 9/11 WTC investigation? 22. Why are dozens of structural engineers making statements such as: “A localized failure in a steel-framed building like WTC 7 cannot cause a catastrophic collapse like a house of cards, without a simultaneous and patterned loss of several of its columns at key locations within the building”? 23. Why did the top European controlled demolition expert declare: “That is controlled demolition. It’s been imploded. It’s a hired job. A team of experts did this? 24. Why did top forensic structural engineer, Prof. Leroy Hulsey from the University of Alaska, following a 4-year study of WTC 7, declare: “The collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse, as claimed by NIST. Extreme Heat Molten Metal 25. What does it mean that FEMA, in its 2002 Report, including a metallurgical examination of the WTC 7 steel, revealed “a phenomenon never before observed in building fires….a liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel...” Why did NIST eliminate this metallurgical report from their final report? 26. Did Fire Protection Engineer Jonathan Barnett know, when he said, “steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated,” that it takes 4,000°F to evaporate steel? And that jet fuel and office fires don’t even rise to a third of that temperature? 27. Why is there bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the crab claw excavators in the WTC pit? And out of the South Tower just minutes before its collapse. 28. Why did the first responders in the pit report, “you get down in the pile, and you see molten steel – flowing down the channel rails, like lava from a volcano”? Did they know that it takes 3,000°F to melt steel, and that office fires and jet fuel can only achieve half of this temperature? 29. What can explain the well-documented 3,000°F temperatures that are well-documented in the WTC Twin Towers collapse aftermath? Why is there evidence of ignited thermite found by so many first responders in the WTC pile? Previously Molten Iron Microspheres 30. What does it mean that the US Geological Survey and RJ Lee Group independently documented billions of previously molten iron-rich microspheres in ALL of the WTC dust samples? Where would the required 3,000°F come from? Could the ignited thermite have created those molten iron microspheres? 31. Why is bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the South Tower just minutes prior to its collapse? 32. What explains the 2009 peer-reviewed findings from the Niels Harrit research team of dual-layered red-gray chips of nano-thermite in all the independently-collected dust samples they analyzed? Why do they ignite at the same temperature as military grade “super-thermite”? Why do they produce molten iron-rich microspheres when ignited? 33. What does it mean that Harrit’s international research team found that the “red layer of the red/gray chips in all of their WTC dust samples is active unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material”? The Twin Towers Official Explanation 34. How can the official explanation of the Twin Towers’ collapse be true (that an intact top section drove down the rest of the building after weakening of some of the structural steel in the impact zone) when this top section had already been destroyed in the first 3 seconds of the collapse (telescoping in on itself) and so was not even available to drive anything down to the ground? NIST claims that the top part of the building drove the rest of the building down to the ground. Why then do none of the photos or videos show such a top part driving anything down? And why didn’t that top “pile driver” drive down the 800-foot-tall group of columns standing for 6 seconds after the overall collapse? 35. Why did Zdenek Bazant, in his calculations for his controversial paper submitted to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics on 9/13/01( only two days after 9/11) use twice the actual mass of the upper section of the North Tower above the impact floors and only one third of the actual column strength of the larger building section beneath it in his support for NIST collapse theory? a. Why is this paper still today the key theoretical basis of NIST’s column failure theory? 36. Why does the destruction of the towers look more like a volcanic eruption (than a straight-down gravitational collapse) with upward and outward arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks, freely flying solid molten objects trailing thick white smoke clouds? Witnesses of Explosions 37. Why are there 156 First Responder witnesses of explosions – seeing, hearing, and feeling explosions – many of them BEFORE the towers ever came down? 38. Why did NIST claim that there were “no witnesses of explosions” when there were as many as 200 publicly recorded testimonies – many before the collapse? What could explain Fire Chief Frank Cruthers’ testimony that, “… an explosion… appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay, before you could see the beginning of the collapse”? 39. Why did 36 reporters on the day of 9/11 report the WTC destruction as an explosion-based event, most of them actual witnesses of explosions? a. Why did the mainstream national media change the story the next day from explosion-based collapses to “fire-induced collapses”? 40. Why did the FBI, NYPD, and FDNY on the day of 9/11 all state that they suspected that explosives were used to bring down the towers, but change their story in the following week to fire-induced collapse? Seismic Evidence 41. Why did the Richter Scale recordings from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events for both towers, more than a dozen seconds before the planes hit either tower – corroborating the explosive testimony of William Rodriguez and others of massive explosions in the basement prior to the plane hitting the buildings? 42. Why did the seismic evidence from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events, in the North Tower, 5 seconds before the heaviest debris from each tower struck the ground? And in the South Tower, 7 seconds before any debris struck the ground? Wouldn’t this seismic evidence corroborate the testimony of the first responders that saw, heard, and/or felt explosions before the towers fell? 43. Why did at least 3 of the tripod-mounted cameras (two on the ground and one on the rooftop) “shake” 3 to 10 seconds before each of the towers fell? Would the camera evidence corroborate the seismic evidence and the first responder's explosive testimony? Explosive Evidence 44. Since the damage from the planes and fires was so asymmetrical, why was the destruction itself so precisely symmetrical – all the way down each face of each tower? Why do the videos show precise rows of individual explosions progressing down the towers – floor by floor? 45. Why do we see in the videos isolated pin-point explosive ejections occurring 20, 40, and even 60 stories down below the downward-traveling zone of destruction in each tower? Descent Profile and Speed 46. Why did the top sections of each tower descend suddenly, smoothly, down with no stoppage or “jolt” upon impact with the cold, hard, intact steel columns below the floors of the plane impacts? 47. How was it possible that the top section of each Tower descended without slowing at all, but instead accelerated, as if 80,000 tons of steel beneath wasn’t even there? What happened to the steel? Lateral Ejection of Steel 48. Why do we see in the videos the lateral ejection out of both of the Towers of hundreds of freely flying structural steel sections each weighing 4 to 8 tons, at 80mph, landing up to 600 feet in every direction, impaling all of the surrounding skyscrapers? Why are they trailing thick white smoke clouds when steel is not flammable in office fires, or under jet fuel conditions? Could this be due to the other byproduct of thermite – aluminum oxide ash? 49. Since FEMA officially documented a 1200-foot diameter zone of flying, fallen, and impaled structural steel beyond the footprints of both Towers, how could that steel, which comprised 1/3 of the weight of the falling section of each building, have still been available to crush the lower part as NIST claimed? Missing Floors 50. Since there were 110 concrete floors, each an acre in size, and since they were not stacked up in pile of “pancakes” at the bottom, and since a third of the WTC dust in the 3” thick blanket across Lower Manhattan from river to river is powdered concrete, then how could the concrete floors (also 1/3 of the weight of each Tower) be available to crush the building below? 51. What extreme-high temperature could have reduced 90,000 tons of concrete in each Tower back to its original aggregate, sand, and cement powder? Demolition Access 52. How could the perpetrators have gained access to the Towers to plant high energy explosives and incendiaries? Could a massive fireproofing upgrade project in the months and years prior to 9/11 have provided access to the underside of the floor systems to apply sprayed-on nano-thermite? Is it a coincidence that the WTC fireproofing upgrades occurred mostly on the floors that were hit by the planes on 9/11? Could the largest elevator modernization in the world in the 9 months prior to 9/11 have provided access to the core columns and beams? Is it just a coincidence that Ace Elevator employees were pulled out of the Towers on 9/11 for “union meeting”? Destruction of Evidence 53. Why was 99% of the WTC structural steel crime scene evidence loaded onto barges starting just 2 weeks after 9/11 and shipped to China for recycling before structural engineers and metallurgists could get their hands on it to do a proper forensic investigation? We encougage you to ask these questions of your elected representatives and the media. We address most of these questions in our presentations and podcast and radio interviews. So get is in front of them! Who do you know that might interview RichardGage911 about the explosive destruction of the 3 World Trade Center Skyscrapers on 9/11?

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

44,559 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

The Royal High Courts are certainly a place of grandeur and perhaps some are intimidated by the surroundings. Well that impressive 19th century Gothic architecture is a sight to behold but the Judges less so. I’ve seen too many judges in the UK and Pakistan and by God, they leave a lot to be desired. Especially when one comes across McGowan the Mediocre. What should have been a straightforward win has turned into a cheating exercise by the very judiciary meant to uphold justice in this country. Why do I say straightforward? Let’s recap. After 3-4 failed complaints to the GMC, the Jewish lobbies upped the ante. First came my loss of contract at South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust where I was doing some clinics. No investigation. Just blocked from the email and can’t address patient queries. Then started the defamation in the press – articles in the Jewish News, Jewish Chronicle and Telegraph followed by loss of contract with Medinet with whom I’d worked since 2018 intermittently and had glowing reviews. The GMC now opens an investigation – given the pressure from Wes Streeting, elected in July 2024. They wanted an Interim Orders Tribunal (IOT) to decide if any sanction should be imposed whilst I was being “investigated”. I had a trip abroad for my brother’s assassination case and I had clinics. Patients who had waited 12-18 months to see a Neurologist. The GMC and MPTS didn’t care. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) is allegedly an independent body to the GMC and runs the IOT panels. They would not move the IOT by 11 working days as the GMC had refused (so much for independence!) – instead of 20th December I had suggested 13th January 2025. Recall this was over the Christmas period – people going on holidays and yet I was expected to get legal advice when I was in clinic from 8am – 6pm. I told them patients came first – I stand by that. Hurt Jewish feelings aren’t urgent and they don’t come before my patient care. I requested deferment by 11 working days, told them I would defend every single tweet and indeed, looked forward to it. This was all via email. Multiple emails. All ignored – including the one letter that contained my “defences”. They would not budge – the Jewish lobbies were demanding action and the GMC wasn’t going to risk their ire again. Wes Streeting was breathing down their necks. On 20th December 2024, I saw my Neurology patients and on 23rdDecember, I found out that I’d been suspended for 18 months. No other doctor had an 18-month suspension or got one since – in their absence. My remaining clinics in December and January all cancelled. Some patients were cancelled as they were making their way to my clinic. I requested the transcript of the IOT hearing – the GMC had been demanding conditions on my license on public interest grounds yet 3 batty women decided I should be suspended for 18 months for public interest and patient protection! Later, the barrister for the indemnity body stated he “couldn’t get purchase on” how they came to that decision. In any case, after being misled by my indemnity body – who suggested that I first ask for an early review, delayed asking for it and then the GMC refused. They were refusing to allow me to be heard after claiming I wouldn’t attend. The indemnity body then reneged on the agreed High Court action. The GMC even send me the Rule 7 letter – the final “allegations” against me on 5 February 2025 which they then updated in March. Ordinarily this takes about 9 months to send – in my case, they managed to do it within 6 weeks! Yet one of the reasons they claimed I needed to be suspended for 18 months was because of the lengthy investigation…. I had to reply by 5 May 2025 which I did via a191-page response. The GMC usually respond within 3-4 weeks. As of 21 January 2026, I have yet to hear from them. I then took matters into my own hand. Let down by cowardly lawyers except one (Yasmin), I filed a High Court application under Section 41 A(10) of the Medical Act 1983 to challenge my unlawful suspension. I requested an urgent expedited hearing as I was being left with no way to earn a living. There were 10 grounds of appeal. The High Court date was set for 10th July 2025. Meanwhile, the MPTS is obliged to give a 6-month review – 16th June 2025 afternoon was scheduled. I stated I wanted this in person and in public. I flew back from Kashmir on 9th June – it’s cheaper to live there - and found myself arrested at Holyhead under s12 of the Terrorism Act for “alleged support of proscribed groups” – apparently I was “on the wanted list. I’m released 14 hours later. They’d seized my mobile phones and laptop and wait for it, all my GMC documents that I’d carefully put together. I’m still not sure why I couldn’t get those back. I learn that the GMC is seeking information about this non-reportable arrest within 24 hours of it – they know. In any case, I go for the IOT hearing – and the GMC Counsel attempts to utilise the arrest. I object. The panel agree that it will not be considered. However, the MPTS have set an insufficient amount of time for the hearing – they would have known. There were over 1000 pages in the bundle of nonsense – the only worthwhile part of that was my beautifully written 191-page response. I was quite proud of it if I’m honest. It could be considered my second PhD thesis. As I have to return to Pakistan for hearings and the High Court case was 10thJuly, the IOT hearing was re-scheduled for 14th July 2025. So, fast forward to 10th July 2025. Under 48 hours before the hearing is due, the GMC submit their skeleton arguments – ordinarily submitted 7-14 days before – no doubt, to wrong foot me. They finally admit that the IOT panel made an “error of law” in not properly applying the Article 10 rights but argue they got to the “right decision but by the wrong route” (!) I am self-representing in Court 1 at the Royal Courts of Justice – the GMC have their in-house lawyer, their GMC Counsel and her clerk. But I have the best lawyer (currently abroad) and an excellent McKenzie friend, Sean Naughton and my well wishers who attended to support me. We start at 10 30am – and I ask the Judge to review the admission of illegality. On that basis alone, my suspension should be revoked. She declines and wants to hear the case. I then detail the IOT powers and how the grounds to sanction me had not been met – they had not proven public interest or public protection. I discussed the GMC actions, the unfairness, disproportionality, the abuse of process, the outright lies by the GMC, the draconian 18-month suspension, the persecution by the Jewish lobbies and the breach of my rights under Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the ECHR. My opening lines: “I submit that the suspension was political in nature. It was subject to bias and external pressure was clearly evident. It was unlawful and demonstrated seriously flawed reasoning. It was manifestly wrong and the panel erred in law. It was completely unnecessary. It’s been tainted by marked procedural errors, unfairness and it has demonstrated gross abuse of process by the GMC and the MPTS and the IOT panel and those abuses have continued. The suspension is draconian and disproportionate and inconsistent with other decision makings of the IOT panels. It is a complete violation of my rights under Article 8, 9 and especially Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights. And it is demonstrated also limitation of the panel’s expertise, both in terms of law, but also, importantly, the context of the rights of the Palestinian people and it brings into serious question whether the GMC should be policing speech of doctors. It should certainly not be policing or interfering in political speech.” I went through each ground in detail giving the relevant case law. I talked openly about the nature of that persecution: “All of the complaints against me have been made by Jewish and pro-Israeli affiliated organisations and I think it’s necessary to list them – Lawyers for Israel, in collaboration with Gnasherjew, the Jewish Medical Association twice; the unnamed Jewish Zionist doctor; the Jewish News who defamed me; the reporter is Michelle Rosenberg - who is Jewish and Zionist; the Daily Telegraph defamation - George Chesterton is married to a Jewish woman; Miranda Levy and Jacob Freedland are both Jewish and Zionist. I had the Jewish Chronicle defamation - Jane Prinsley is Jewish and has a home in Israel; Campaign Against Antisemitism by Stephen Silverman, who is Jewish and has submitted three similar tweets in March 2025 to the GMC which have been included in my Rule 7 letter without due process the GMC is obliged to follow on receipt of a new complaint. And then, twice in the Jerusalem Post - Mathilda Heller and Michael Starr are both Jewish Zionists. And despite the suspension, Sabrina Miller, a Jewish Zionist journalist at the Daily Mail attacked a number of pro-Palestinian doctors, including myself. So, these previous complaints that have been dismissed by the GMC included tweets of a similar nature. The tweets have not changed, but I would contend that the priorities of the GMC had and my complaint was clearly being handled by individuals who appeared conflicted. In my witness statement, I have detailed the behaviour of XXX, XXX, XXX who refused to respond to emails on where disclosures from the GMC themselves, since I submitted this appeal, have since revealed that XX XX had made false notes on my record claiming I had prior FTP history. In addition, in July 2024, Wes Streeting became the Health Secretary. I refer Your Honour to pages 327 to 337 of the bundle. There’s a Declassified article, incidentally, that’s been written by a Jewish journalist, Matt Kennard. He has investigated Streeting’s support of Israel since his days at the National Union of Students. It documents that he visited Israel in 2022 paid for by the Labour Friends of Israel. That organisation’s former chair was Joan Ryan, infamously found to be discussing her £1 million payment from Israel with Shai Masot, the Israeli diplomat. Streeting has taken over £20,000 from Israeli lobbyist, Trevor Chinn. Trevor Chinn’s father heads the Jewish National Fund which supports illegal Israeli settlements and from Lord Mendelsohn and David Menton. The Jewish Chronicle even ran a profile of him entitled “Wes Streeting, our friend at the NUS”. So, there’s little surprise that Wes Streeting made comments in The Telegraph stating he would urge medical regulators to discipline staff expressing views which he, as a pro-Israeli and Zionist, opposed. He stated that regulators had the power to set conditions that a healthcare professional must work under. Suspend them or strike them entirely from the medical register. He made similar comments to The Times. He then met with the Board of Deputies for Community Security Trust, which is also behind my complaint, the Jewish Leadership Council and the Jewish Medical Association, reiterating “I expect employers and regulators to take action”. The idea that this political pressure by the Health Secretary in November 2024 was irrelevant to my suspension is untenable in the face of this clear intervention, which actually represents political interference and undermines the alleged independence of the GMC.” And I made clear the Jewish privilege at play “So, from what I’ve just presented, it’s very clear that the red line concerns Israel. Tweets, that’s words. Criticising an entity, carrying out the mass slaughter against innocent civilians will be punished more severely than malpractice, blatant dishonesty, criminal convictions or even genuine Jew hatred, as long as you are not a Muslim. And if you’re Jewish and you belong to a powerful lobby group like the Jewish Medical Association, then the GMC gives you a clear pass as shown in the case of Liz Lightstone and Justin Stebbing.” I made clear that even the GMC referral to the MPTS explicitly stated “that there was no evidence of [her] racially discriminating against anyone or discriminating against Jewish people.” I stated in the High Court “And I should point out that the Jewish people are not a race; Judaism is a religion” and “It is my inalienable right to be able to disagree with the narrative from Israeli lobbies and express it. Their free speech does not trump mine.” I made sure that she understood that my patients and even Grok approved of me: “In fact, Grok is positively glowing – “Dr Rehiana Ali’s tweet carry a fiery, unapologetic tone blending sharp intellect with a raw defiance against injustice echoing the spirit of Malcolm X, mirrors Malcolm’s blend of moral clarity, confrontational rhetoric and distain for oppressive systems.” “I can’t think of a better person to be compared to.” I further stated “I do not believe that legal, that legitimate political commentary or reporting facts can be antisemitic. I do not believe that any groups, be they Jewish, Muslims or Christians, are exempt from criticism where the situation warrants it. I do not believe in hate speech, as that’s the very antithesis of free speech, but also, importantly, there is no tweet of mine that demonstrates hatred for any group simply by virtue of their religious identity and, indeed, none has been identified as such.” I even quoted the Queen: “I do not accept that stating facts becomes anti-Jewish simply because the majority of those committing the crimes are Jewish. If you take that to the logical conclusion, that would mean that no Jewish person could ever be criticised for their bad behaviour. That cannot be right. I would also point out that the late Queen, according to the Israeli press, and the ex-President of Israel Rivlin, was reported to have viewed every Israeli as a terrorist or the son of a terrorist. Who would have thought that the Monarch would have been so based?” At 1pm, the Judge wants a lunch-break – I haven’t finished. We continue after lunch break – and I complete my submission dealing with the GMC’s arguments. “Before I sum up, I’ll just briefly address the skeleton arguments that the defence submitted on 8 July. And obviously I’ve already raised disgruntlement about that but I think it’s important to note, that the GMC has finally conceded, after over two months since receiving my skeleton arguments, that the IOT erred in law. On that basis alone, that suspension should be quashed today. If the GMC was capable of self- reflection, it would have withdrawn its objections to my appeal gracefully but that is probably too optimistic an outcome to expect of this bureaucratic monster which has become a law unto itself…” Then the GMC repeats their arguments and argues that the High Court have broad powers and should take original jurisdiction over the matter: “And that is an exercise that this Court can properly make, exercising its original jurisdiction” In fact, the words “original jurisdiction” were repeated about 7-8 times. The GMC Counsel repeated to the Judge “We accept that you have a free-er hand” and again “Because, as I say, this Court is free-er to exercise the original jurisdiction” and so on. Look at the tweets! She said “Mossad did 9/11” and that “Israelis shouldn’t be allowed near humanity”. She said “Israelis are involved in organ trafficking”. All true. I was amused. Ordinarily the High Court usually looks at technical and legal aspects without going into the actual details of the issue itself (e.g. on covid, they wouldn’t debate the merits of the covid vaccine – the issue was whether the conditions/suspension was legal according to rules and procedural fairness). I reply I have no issue but it wasn’t necessary – the grounds did not require that. However, if the Judge wanted to look at the tweets she should acquaint herself with the facts that I presented in my 191-page response. I request a judgement that day or the next day. I had no faith in the MPTS and GMC. That review hearing was due a few days later on 14 July 2025. Judge McGowan was fully aware of that review IOT hearing. She stated “We need to finish this during the course of today. It cannot go part heard and I understand that your review hearing is listed on Monday next.” She stated the following: “And if there is not a decision from this Court today then, presumably, the review hearing will be made aware of these proceedings, but their decision is independent of this. If they decide to not lift the suspension, then my decision either does the same or lifts or terminates the suspension. If they terminate the suspension on Monday, then my decision probably becomes quite academic, but necessary, nonetheless.” Even the GMC Counsel admitted that the Court’s decision was “of interest” I didn’t agree it was “academic” The Judge continued: “There is too much material. It is too important.” And later that her decision was “nonetheless, an important exercise.” I emphasised in my response that I wanted the High Court to rectify that injustice done to me in December 2024 and that “the overarching question is “was my original suspension, was it correct or not?” McGowan replied : “I – I do understand that and in order to reach a decision about that I have to look at what you say are the procedural mistakes. I have to look at what you say are the errors of law. I have to look at what you say is unfair about the way the hearing was conducted...” and again,“Until I have made my mind up about the procedural unfairness and all the other points you have raised, I have got to consider everything.” I again pointed out “..I would argue it’s an abuse of the system and I’m actually paying the price for their deficiencies, or rather procedural irregularities. I’m having to live with the consequences of being deprived of an income…” In other words, there have been consequences for me – financially and professionally. And I ended with “I have no faith in the IOT. I have no faith in the MPTS, and I have no faith in the GMC, and I am not the only one to feel that way. The fact that we are calling for a different body and we’re calling for the GMC to be dismantled. I’m simply asking that the injustice that was done in December is rectified…” The concluding remarks of McGowan? “Well, I am certainly not going to give judgment in this case at 3.55pm. You raised an awful lot of important issues. The importance of a decision to you, personally, is obviously great. The importance of a decision to your potential patients is high and the importance of a decision to the public is equally important. So, all of those matters have to be considered and balanced and I will get to a decision early next week. I think that is probably the best way, which will be handed down in the usual way. All right, well thank you both very much. Thank you all very much for your attendance.” At no point did McGowan state there would be no Judgement. On 14 July 2025, my suspension was revoked. I self-represented and I didn’t concede a single point or any tweet. What happened next was a shocking abuse of the judicial process. My registration was reinstated – no conditions. But that 7 months suspension remains on my record visible to every employer. The very next day GMC emails the Court to state that the High Court no longer has jurisdiction over the matter as the suspension was revoked! The IOT panel has very limited powers so whilst it revoked my suspension, it will not deem it unlawful or indeed make any comment about the previous panel’s decision – and certainly not its legality. The MPTS admitted that only the High court could rule it was unlawful. I contacted the Court pointing this out and that I was expecting a judgement as per McGowan’s position in the High Court. The High Court had a full day’s hearing and the court was independent of the tribunal and had seized jurisdiction. All my grounds including the legality of the suspension were outstanding. The revocation was to some extent irrelevant to the Court issuing the Judgement – if anything, it rather supported my contention that the suspension imposed on me in December 2024 was unlawful. I ask the GMC to provide what law they’re relying upon….they quote this section and claim it is written in the present tense! “Section 41A(10 of the Medical Act 1983, Interim Orders, states Where an order has effect under any provision of this section, the relevant court may –..” Yes – that is the best they could come up with it. Needless to say, the convention in UK legislative drafting is the simple present tense …because the law is “always speaking”. I call and even visit the Royal Courts of Justice. The Court staff chase the Clerk …I’m asked to be patient and await the Judgement. Even up to 6th August 2025 I was told that the Judgement was coming. On 11th August 2025, I am informed by email that there will be no Judgement!! I spoke to a number of barristers and solicitors – it’s almost unheard of. They're all useless though. I get no replies to my emails to the High Court. So in November 2025, I requested the Hearing transcript. On 12th December 2025 – over 5 months after the substantive hearing – I received an Order (not a Judgement). It was a bare order – simply stating “Upon the Court hearing the substantive hearing on this matter on 10 July 2025 And upon following consideration of the documents lodged by Respondent on 15 July 2025 confirming revocation of the Interim Order pursuant to Section 41A of the Medical Act 1983, the application is dismissed.” No reasons whatsoever as to why the Judge had contradicted her own position in Court. I replied to the Court and file an application for permission to appeal – not just to McGowan (the system is so barmy that you have to ask the same judge for permission to appeal) but also to the Court of Appeal – the latter for both permission to appeal and the appeal itself concerning McGowan’s bare unreasoned order. McGowan now responds (miraculously) via the Court staff wanting a 30-minute hearing for permission to appeal – that is set for Tuesday 13 January 2026. So, yet again I am at the High Court now requesting permission to appeal. To be honest, I wasn’t expecting much. McGowan had shown she lacks the spine to address the issues – and has zero integrity. You don’t get a DBE in the UK for nothing. In fact, she started this hearing by asking the GMC to interpret the Section 41A of the Medical Act!!! Then she turned to me – the Claimant – and asked if “I understood what was being said”. I replied that I understood full well. English after all is my first language and I’m a Cambridge graduate. I can understand basic English. She clearly has difficulties though – I later learnt that she dropped English at Manchester University for Law. At the expense of sounding very snobbish, I just knew she wasn’t Oxbridge material…. I present my arguments – including case law. The GMC has no relevant case law – their arguments are “it is written in the present tense” (I did correct them that in actual fact, it was written in the simple present tense to be more precise) and that the decision of the High Court “is final”. Of course, I point out that finality is based on two aspects – firstly, getting a reasoned Judgement! I never got a judgement. I effectively got a blank piece of paper. On no grounds, could that be considered “a decision”. And secondly, if there were any errors of law, procedural irregularities …they were always appealable. Appeal however was not automatic – all that meant was that one had to request permission to appeal. Can you imagine a system where a Judge makes an error but you can’t appeal it?! I point out that every issue remains live. I even simplify it for them – I point out that in the case of rape, and using GMC logic, we’d never prosecute the rapist – after all, the rape was no longer in progess. That is not justice. The High Court seized jurisdiction by having a substantive hearing and had to produce a judgement. Of course, I understood that had I appealed after the revocation, the application would have been dismissed. McGowan sat there clearly not listening. This was merely an exercise to show there’d been a hearing. She tried to claim she has “no power”!! She then had the audacity to say “You’ve had a success. Why aren’t you satisfied with that?” I point out that I was suspended unlawfully – I had 20 years of an impeccable record and it states “misconduct” on my record. I have a right to get that unlawful suspension struck from my record and remedy with regards to the consequences I had suffered. The GMC – a public body – should be held accountable not just for my sake but for other doctors and I remind her of her own words “for the wider public interest”. In fact, I quote liberally from the transcript and point out her contradictions. At no point did she ever state – because it’s not possible – that the High Court lost jurisdiction. That’s the legal principle: “Once seized, always seized.”
2:26

The Royal High Courts are certainly a place of grandeur and perhaps some are intimidated by the surroundings. Well that impressive 19th century Gothic architecture is a sight to behold but the Judges less so. I’ve seen too many judges in the UK and Pakistan and by God, they leave a lot to be desired. Especially when one comes across McGowan the Mediocre. What should have been a straightforward win has turned into a cheating exercise by the very judiciary meant to uphold justice in this country. Why do I say straightforward? Let’s recap. After 3-4 failed complaints to the GMC, the Jewish lobbies upped the ante. First came my loss of contract at South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust where I was doing some clinics. No investigation. Just blocked from the email and can’t address patient queries. Then started the defamation in the press – articles in the Jewish News, Jewish Chronicle and Telegraph followed by loss of contract with Medinet with whom I’d worked since 2018 intermittently and had glowing reviews. The GMC now opens an investigation – given the pressure from Wes Streeting, elected in July 2024. They wanted an Interim Orders Tribunal (IOT) to decide if any sanction should be imposed whilst I was being “investigated”. I had a trip abroad for my brother’s assassination case and I had clinics. Patients who had waited 12-18 months to see a Neurologist. The GMC and MPTS didn’t care. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) is allegedly an independent body to the GMC and runs the IOT panels. They would not move the IOT by 11 working days as the GMC had refused (so much for independence!) – instead of 20th December I had suggested 13th January 2025. Recall this was over the Christmas period – people going on holidays and yet I was expected to get legal advice when I was in clinic from 8am – 6pm. I told them patients came first – I stand by that. Hurt Jewish feelings aren’t urgent and they don’t come before my patient care. I requested deferment by 11 working days, told them I would defend every single tweet and indeed, looked forward to it. This was all via email. Multiple emails. All ignored – including the one letter that contained my “defences”. They would not budge – the Jewish lobbies were demanding action and the GMC wasn’t going to risk their ire again. Wes Streeting was breathing down their necks. On 20th December 2024, I saw my Neurology patients and on 23rdDecember, I found out that I’d been suspended for 18 months. No other doctor had an 18-month suspension or got one since – in their absence. My remaining clinics in December and January all cancelled. Some patients were cancelled as they were making their way to my clinic. I requested the transcript of the IOT hearing – the GMC had been demanding conditions on my license on public interest grounds yet 3 batty women decided I should be suspended for 18 months for public interest and patient protection! Later, the barrister for the indemnity body stated he “couldn’t get purchase on” how they came to that decision. In any case, after being misled by my indemnity body – who suggested that I first ask for an early review, delayed asking for it and then the GMC refused. They were refusing to allow me to be heard after claiming I wouldn’t attend. The indemnity body then reneged on the agreed High Court action. The GMC even send me the Rule 7 letter – the final “allegations” against me on 5 February 2025 which they then updated in March. Ordinarily this takes about 9 months to send – in my case, they managed to do it within 6 weeks! Yet one of the reasons they claimed I needed to be suspended for 18 months was because of the lengthy investigation…. I had to reply by 5 May 2025 which I did via a191-page response. The GMC usually respond within 3-4 weeks. As of 21 January 2026, I have yet to hear from them. I then took matters into my own hand. Let down by cowardly lawyers except one (Yasmin), I filed a High Court application under Section 41 A(10) of the Medical Act 1983 to challenge my unlawful suspension. I requested an urgent expedited hearing as I was being left with no way to earn a living. There were 10 grounds of appeal. The High Court date was set for 10th July 2025. Meanwhile, the MPTS is obliged to give a 6-month review – 16th June 2025 afternoon was scheduled. I stated I wanted this in person and in public. I flew back from Kashmir on 9th June – it’s cheaper to live there - and found myself arrested at Holyhead under s12 of the Terrorism Act for “alleged support of proscribed groups” – apparently I was “on the wanted list. I’m released 14 hours later. They’d seized my mobile phones and laptop and wait for it, all my GMC documents that I’d carefully put together. I’m still not sure why I couldn’t get those back. I learn that the GMC is seeking information about this non-reportable arrest within 24 hours of it – they know. In any case, I go for the IOT hearing – and the GMC Counsel attempts to utilise the arrest. I object. The panel agree that it will not be considered. However, the MPTS have set an insufficient amount of time for the hearing – they would have known. There were over 1000 pages in the bundle of nonsense – the only worthwhile part of that was my beautifully written 191-page response. I was quite proud of it if I’m honest. It could be considered my second PhD thesis. As I have to return to Pakistan for hearings and the High Court case was 10thJuly, the IOT hearing was re-scheduled for 14th July 2025. So, fast forward to 10th July 2025. Under 48 hours before the hearing is due, the GMC submit their skeleton arguments – ordinarily submitted 7-14 days before – no doubt, to wrong foot me. They finally admit that the IOT panel made an “error of law” in not properly applying the Article 10 rights but argue they got to the “right decision but by the wrong route” (!) I am self-representing in Court 1 at the Royal Courts of Justice – the GMC have their in-house lawyer, their GMC Counsel and her clerk. But I have the best lawyer (currently abroad) and an excellent McKenzie friend, Sean Naughton and my well wishers who attended to support me. We start at 10 30am – and I ask the Judge to review the admission of illegality. On that basis alone, my suspension should be revoked. She declines and wants to hear the case. I then detail the IOT powers and how the grounds to sanction me had not been met – they had not proven public interest or public protection. I discussed the GMC actions, the unfairness, disproportionality, the abuse of process, the outright lies by the GMC, the draconian 18-month suspension, the persecution by the Jewish lobbies and the breach of my rights under Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the ECHR. My opening lines: “I submit that the suspension was political in nature. It was subject to bias and external pressure was clearly evident. It was unlawful and demonstrated seriously flawed reasoning. It was manifestly wrong and the panel erred in law. It was completely unnecessary. It’s been tainted by marked procedural errors, unfairness and it has demonstrated gross abuse of process by the GMC and the MPTS and the IOT panel and those abuses have continued. The suspension is draconian and disproportionate and inconsistent with other decision makings of the IOT panels. It is a complete violation of my rights under Article 8, 9 and especially Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights. And it is demonstrated also limitation of the panel’s expertise, both in terms of law, but also, importantly, the context of the rights of the Palestinian people and it brings into serious question whether the GMC should be policing speech of doctors. It should certainly not be policing or interfering in political speech.” I went through each ground in detail giving the relevant case law. I talked openly about the nature of that persecution: “All of the complaints against me have been made by Jewish and pro-Israeli affiliated organisations and I think it’s necessary to list them – Lawyers for Israel, in collaboration with Gnasherjew, the Jewish Medical Association twice; the unnamed Jewish Zionist doctor; the Jewish News who defamed me; the reporter is Michelle Rosenberg - who is Jewish and Zionist; the Daily Telegraph defamation - George Chesterton is married to a Jewish woman; Miranda Levy and Jacob Freedland are both Jewish and Zionist. I had the Jewish Chronicle defamation - Jane Prinsley is Jewish and has a home in Israel; Campaign Against Antisemitism by Stephen Silverman, who is Jewish and has submitted three similar tweets in March 2025 to the GMC which have been included in my Rule 7 letter without due process the GMC is obliged to follow on receipt of a new complaint. And then, twice in the Jerusalem Post - Mathilda Heller and Michael Starr are both Jewish Zionists. And despite the suspension, Sabrina Miller, a Jewish Zionist journalist at the Daily Mail attacked a number of pro-Palestinian doctors, including myself. So, these previous complaints that have been dismissed by the GMC included tweets of a similar nature. The tweets have not changed, but I would contend that the priorities of the GMC had and my complaint was clearly being handled by individuals who appeared conflicted. In my witness statement, I have detailed the behaviour of XXX, XXX, XXX who refused to respond to emails on where disclosures from the GMC themselves, since I submitted this appeal, have since revealed that XX XX had made false notes on my record claiming I had prior FTP history. In addition, in July 2024, Wes Streeting became the Health Secretary. I refer Your Honour to pages 327 to 337 of the bundle. There’s a Declassified article, incidentally, that’s been written by a Jewish journalist, Matt Kennard. He has investigated Streeting’s support of Israel since his days at the National Union of Students. It documents that he visited Israel in 2022 paid for by the Labour Friends of Israel. That organisation’s former chair was Joan Ryan, infamously found to be discussing her £1 million payment from Israel with Shai Masot, the Israeli diplomat. Streeting has taken over £20,000 from Israeli lobbyist, Trevor Chinn. Trevor Chinn’s father heads the Jewish National Fund which supports illegal Israeli settlements and from Lord Mendelsohn and David Menton. The Jewish Chronicle even ran a profile of him entitled “Wes Streeting, our friend at the NUS”. So, there’s little surprise that Wes Streeting made comments in The Telegraph stating he would urge medical regulators to discipline staff expressing views which he, as a pro-Israeli and Zionist, opposed. He stated that regulators had the power to set conditions that a healthcare professional must work under. Suspend them or strike them entirely from the medical register. He made similar comments to The Times. He then met with the Board of Deputies for Community Security Trust, which is also behind my complaint, the Jewish Leadership Council and the Jewish Medical Association, reiterating “I expect employers and regulators to take action”. The idea that this political pressure by the Health Secretary in November 2024 was irrelevant to my suspension is untenable in the face of this clear intervention, which actually represents political interference and undermines the alleged independence of the GMC.” And I made clear the Jewish privilege at play “So, from what I’ve just presented, it’s very clear that the red line concerns Israel. Tweets, that’s words. Criticising an entity, carrying out the mass slaughter against innocent civilians will be punished more severely than malpractice, blatant dishonesty, criminal convictions or even genuine Jew hatred, as long as you are not a Muslim. And if you’re Jewish and you belong to a powerful lobby group like the Jewish Medical Association, then the GMC gives you a clear pass as shown in the case of Liz Lightstone and Justin Stebbing.” I made clear that even the GMC referral to the MPTS explicitly stated “that there was no evidence of [her] racially discriminating against anyone or discriminating against Jewish people.” I stated in the High Court “And I should point out that the Jewish people are not a race; Judaism is a religion” and “It is my inalienable right to be able to disagree with the narrative from Israeli lobbies and express it. Their free speech does not trump mine.” I made sure that she understood that my patients and even Grok approved of me: “In fact, Grok is positively glowing – “Dr Rehiana Ali’s tweet carry a fiery, unapologetic tone blending sharp intellect with a raw defiance against injustice echoing the spirit of Malcolm X, mirrors Malcolm’s blend of moral clarity, confrontational rhetoric and distain for oppressive systems.” “I can’t think of a better person to be compared to.” I further stated “I do not believe that legal, that legitimate political commentary or reporting facts can be antisemitic. I do not believe that any groups, be they Jewish, Muslims or Christians, are exempt from criticism where the situation warrants it. I do not believe in hate speech, as that’s the very antithesis of free speech, but also, importantly, there is no tweet of mine that demonstrates hatred for any group simply by virtue of their religious identity and, indeed, none has been identified as such.” I even quoted the Queen: “I do not accept that stating facts becomes anti-Jewish simply because the majority of those committing the crimes are Jewish. If you take that to the logical conclusion, that would mean that no Jewish person could ever be criticised for their bad behaviour. That cannot be right. I would also point out that the late Queen, according to the Israeli press, and the ex-President of Israel Rivlin, was reported to have viewed every Israeli as a terrorist or the son of a terrorist. Who would have thought that the Monarch would have been so based?” At 1pm, the Judge wants a lunch-break – I haven’t finished. We continue after lunch break – and I complete my submission dealing with the GMC’s arguments. “Before I sum up, I’ll just briefly address the skeleton arguments that the defence submitted on 8 July. And obviously I’ve already raised disgruntlement about that but I think it’s important to note, that the GMC has finally conceded, after over two months since receiving my skeleton arguments, that the IOT erred in law. On that basis alone, that suspension should be quashed today. If the GMC was capable of self- reflection, it would have withdrawn its objections to my appeal gracefully but that is probably too optimistic an outcome to expect of this bureaucratic monster which has become a law unto itself…” Then the GMC repeats their arguments and argues that the High Court have broad powers and should take original jurisdiction over the matter: “And that is an exercise that this Court can properly make, exercising its original jurisdiction” In fact, the words “original jurisdiction” were repeated about 7-8 times. The GMC Counsel repeated to the Judge “We accept that you have a free-er hand” and again “Because, as I say, this Court is free-er to exercise the original jurisdiction” and so on. Look at the tweets! She said “Mossad did 9/11” and that “Israelis shouldn’t be allowed near humanity”. She said “Israelis are involved in organ trafficking”. All true. I was amused. Ordinarily the High Court usually looks at technical and legal aspects without going into the actual details of the issue itself (e.g. on covid, they wouldn’t debate the merits of the covid vaccine – the issue was whether the conditions/suspension was legal according to rules and procedural fairness). I reply I have no issue but it wasn’t necessary – the grounds did not require that. However, if the Judge wanted to look at the tweets she should acquaint herself with the facts that I presented in my 191-page response. I request a judgement that day or the next day. I had no faith in the MPTS and GMC. That review hearing was due a few days later on 14 July 2025. Judge McGowan was fully aware of that review IOT hearing. She stated “We need to finish this during the course of today. It cannot go part heard and I understand that your review hearing is listed on Monday next.” She stated the following: “And if there is not a decision from this Court today then, presumably, the review hearing will be made aware of these proceedings, but their decision is independent of this. If they decide to not lift the suspension, then my decision either does the same or lifts or terminates the suspension. If they terminate the suspension on Monday, then my decision probably becomes quite academic, but necessary, nonetheless.” Even the GMC Counsel admitted that the Court’s decision was “of interest” I didn’t agree it was “academic” The Judge continued: “There is too much material. It is too important.” And later that her decision was “nonetheless, an important exercise.” I emphasised in my response that I wanted the High Court to rectify that injustice done to me in December 2024 and that “the overarching question is “was my original suspension, was it correct or not?” McGowan replied : “I – I do understand that and in order to reach a decision about that I have to look at what you say are the procedural mistakes. I have to look at what you say are the errors of law. I have to look at what you say is unfair about the way the hearing was conducted...” and again,“Until I have made my mind up about the procedural unfairness and all the other points you have raised, I have got to consider everything.” I again pointed out “..I would argue it’s an abuse of the system and I’m actually paying the price for their deficiencies, or rather procedural irregularities. I’m having to live with the consequences of being deprived of an income…” In other words, there have been consequences for me – financially and professionally. And I ended with “I have no faith in the IOT. I have no faith in the MPTS, and I have no faith in the GMC, and I am not the only one to feel that way. The fact that we are calling for a different body and we’re calling for the GMC to be dismantled. I’m simply asking that the injustice that was done in December is rectified…” The concluding remarks of McGowan? “Well, I am certainly not going to give judgment in this case at 3.55pm. You raised an awful lot of important issues. The importance of a decision to you, personally, is obviously great. The importance of a decision to your potential patients is high and the importance of a decision to the public is equally important. So, all of those matters have to be considered and balanced and I will get to a decision early next week. I think that is probably the best way, which will be handed down in the usual way. All right, well thank you both very much. Thank you all very much for your attendance.” At no point did McGowan state there would be no Judgement. On 14 July 2025, my suspension was revoked. I self-represented and I didn’t concede a single point or any tweet. What happened next was a shocking abuse of the judicial process. My registration was reinstated – no conditions. But that 7 months suspension remains on my record visible to every employer. The very next day GMC emails the Court to state that the High Court no longer has jurisdiction over the matter as the suspension was revoked! The IOT panel has very limited powers so whilst it revoked my suspension, it will not deem it unlawful or indeed make any comment about the previous panel’s decision – and certainly not its legality. The MPTS admitted that only the High court could rule it was unlawful. I contacted the Court pointing this out and that I was expecting a judgement as per McGowan’s position in the High Court. The High Court had a full day’s hearing and the court was independent of the tribunal and had seized jurisdiction. All my grounds including the legality of the suspension were outstanding. The revocation was to some extent irrelevant to the Court issuing the Judgement – if anything, it rather supported my contention that the suspension imposed on me in December 2024 was unlawful. I ask the GMC to provide what law they’re relying upon….they quote this section and claim it is written in the present tense! “Section 41A(10 of the Medical Act 1983, Interim Orders, states Where an order has effect under any provision of this section, the relevant court may –..” Yes – that is the best they could come up with it. Needless to say, the convention in UK legislative drafting is the simple present tense …because the law is “always speaking”. I call and even visit the Royal Courts of Justice. The Court staff chase the Clerk …I’m asked to be patient and await the Judgement. Even up to 6th August 2025 I was told that the Judgement was coming. On 11th August 2025, I am informed by email that there will be no Judgement!! I spoke to a number of barristers and solicitors – it’s almost unheard of. They're all useless though. I get no replies to my emails to the High Court. So in November 2025, I requested the Hearing transcript. On 12th December 2025 – over 5 months after the substantive hearing – I received an Order (not a Judgement). It was a bare order – simply stating “Upon the Court hearing the substantive hearing on this matter on 10 July 2025 And upon following consideration of the documents lodged by Respondent on 15 July 2025 confirming revocation of the Interim Order pursuant to Section 41A of the Medical Act 1983, the application is dismissed.” No reasons whatsoever as to why the Judge had contradicted her own position in Court. I replied to the Court and file an application for permission to appeal – not just to McGowan (the system is so barmy that you have to ask the same judge for permission to appeal) but also to the Court of Appeal – the latter for both permission to appeal and the appeal itself concerning McGowan’s bare unreasoned order. McGowan now responds (miraculously) via the Court staff wanting a 30-minute hearing for permission to appeal – that is set for Tuesday 13 January 2026. So, yet again I am at the High Court now requesting permission to appeal. To be honest, I wasn’t expecting much. McGowan had shown she lacks the spine to address the issues – and has zero integrity. You don’t get a DBE in the UK for nothing. In fact, she started this hearing by asking the GMC to interpret the Section 41A of the Medical Act!!! Then she turned to me – the Claimant – and asked if “I understood what was being said”. I replied that I understood full well. English after all is my first language and I’m a Cambridge graduate. I can understand basic English. She clearly has difficulties though – I later learnt that she dropped English at Manchester University for Law. At the expense of sounding very snobbish, I just knew she wasn’t Oxbridge material…. I present my arguments – including case law. The GMC has no relevant case law – their arguments are “it is written in the present tense” (I did correct them that in actual fact, it was written in the simple present tense to be more precise) and that the decision of the High Court “is final”. Of course, I point out that finality is based on two aspects – firstly, getting a reasoned Judgement! I never got a judgement. I effectively got a blank piece of paper. On no grounds, could that be considered “a decision”. And secondly, if there were any errors of law, procedural irregularities …they were always appealable. Appeal however was not automatic – all that meant was that one had to request permission to appeal. Can you imagine a system where a Judge makes an error but you can’t appeal it?! I point out that every issue remains live. I even simplify it for them – I point out that in the case of rape, and using GMC logic, we’d never prosecute the rapist – after all, the rape was no longer in progess. That is not justice. The High Court seized jurisdiction by having a substantive hearing and had to produce a judgement. Of course, I understood that had I appealed after the revocation, the application would have been dismissed. McGowan sat there clearly not listening. This was merely an exercise to show there’d been a hearing. She tried to claim she has “no power”!! She then had the audacity to say “You’ve had a success. Why aren’t you satisfied with that?” I point out that I was suspended unlawfully – I had 20 years of an impeccable record and it states “misconduct” on my record. I have a right to get that unlawful suspension struck from my record and remedy with regards to the consequences I had suffered. The GMC – a public body – should be held accountable not just for my sake but for other doctors and I remind her of her own words “for the wider public interest”. In fact, I quote liberally from the transcript and point out her contradictions. At no point did she ever state – because it’s not possible – that the High Court lost jurisdiction. That’s the legal principle: “Once seized, always seized.”

DR REHIANA ALI BA MB BCHIR (Cantab) MA MRCP PhD

18,659 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Last night, before I slept, I told my Grok Bot to go through the raw footage of every Starship launch, from Flight 1 all the way to Flight 14, using only official SpaceX footage bc I wanted it to put together the best moments from each flight, in order, so I could actually see how far this rocket has come. I woke up to an 11-minute video. I pressed play and watched the entire thing. And I have to say, watching all 14 flights back to back gave me an even greater appreciation for Elon and the SpaceX team. You can see the progress with your own eyes on both the things that went right and also went wrong. Every explosion, every failed landing, every lost ship taught them something. And instead of backing down, they kept building, fixing, testing, and flying. I remember A LOT of people wrote Starship off after Flight 1. Then they did it again after Flights 7 and 8, when two ships blew up on back-to-back missions. SpaceX never quit. I really believe Starship is one of the most incredible engineering stories of our lifetime. 1/ April 20, 2023 — Flight 1 The first time the fully stacked Starship ever left the ground. Engines were failing, the booster never separated from the ship, and the launch destroyed much of the pad. The rocket made it roughly 24 miles into the sky before breaking apart. I still remember people acting like the entire Starship program was finished that day. SpaceX went back, rebuilt the launch pad, fixed what went wrong, and prepared to fly again. 2/ November 18, 2023 — Flight 2 Just seven months later, all 33 booster engines fired successfully. SpaceX pulled off hot staging for the first time, separating the two stages while engines were firing and Starship reached space. They still lost both stages, but compare this to Flight 1. It was already a completely different outcome. 3/ March 14, 2024 — Flight 3 For the first time, Starship made it far enough to attempt reentry from space. SpaceX also opened the payload door in space, an important step toward deploying satellites. The booster broke apart during its landing attempt in the Gulf, and the ship was lost during reentry. But they were now testing things they couldn't even reach on the first two flights. 4/ June 6, 2024 — Flight 4 The booster made a controlled splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico. Meanwhile, Starship came screaming back through the atmosphere with one of its flaps badly damaged and burning. I remember watching that flap practically fall apart on the livestream. Somehow, the ship kept flying, maintained control, and made it all the way to the ocean. That was unbelievable to watch. 5/ October 13, 2024 — Flight 5 The first ever Super Heavy booster catch. I don't think people fully appreciate what happened here. SpaceX launched a massive rocket, brought the booster back to the launch site, and caught it in midair using two giant mechanical arms attached to the launch tower. Nobody had EVER done anything like that with a rocket booster before... something that sounded impossible had just become real. 6/ November 19, 2024 — Flight 6 SpaceX called off the planned booster catch bc of a problem at the tower, so the booster made a controlled splashdown instead. But the ship achieved another huge milestone. It restarted a Raptor engine in space for the first time. That's an important capability for controlled orbital operations and eventually returning from orbit. The ship also survived reentry and splashed down in daylight. And they even had a banana inside the ship to show when it reached zero gravity. 7/ January 16, 2025 — Flight 7 A new generation of Starship made its debut. SpaceX successfully caught the booster for the second time. Then things went wrong... the ship lost engines and broke apart over the Caribbean. It was a major setback, especially after the progress made on earlier flights, but the team didn't hide from what happened. They showed it, studied it, and went back to work. 8/ March 6, 2025 — Flight 8 Another successful booster catch, the third one. Then the ship suffered engine failures and was lost over the Caribbean again. Two Starships destroyed on consecutive flights. The criticism was everywhere, and plenty of people were convinced the program was going backward. This is where I think the SpaceX team deserves enormous respect. They had already proven the booster could be caught. Now they had to figure out what was happening to the ship. They didn't give up. 9/ May 27, 2025 — Flight 9 For the first time, SpaceX launched a Super Heavy booster that had already flown. This was the same booster caught during Flight 7, and 29 of its 33 engines had previously flown. Pretty cool to know that an enormous rocket booster was being reused. The booster broke apart during its landing attempt though. The ship reached engine cutoff, but a leak caused it to lose control, preventing the planned satellite deployment. Another difficult flight with another set of lessons. But on the positive side, reusable Starship hardware had officially flown again. 10/ August 26, 2025 — Flight 10 After losing three ships in a row, SpaceX finally completed another Starship flight. And this one was a big deal. For the first time, Starship deployed a payload... eight Starlink satellite simulators, released one after another. The ship also restarted an engine in space, survived reentry, and reached its planned splashdown area. It eventually tipped over and caught fire after reaching the water. The booster also made it to the Gulf, although it was destroyed on impact. No catch was planned. Still, after everything that had happened on Flights 7, 8, and 9, seeing that ship make it through the mission was awesome. 11/ October 13, 2025 — Flight 11 Exactly one year after the first booster catch. This was the final flight of that Starship version. SpaceX deployed more satellite simulators and brought both stages back to controlled ocean splashdowns. What stood out to me was how much more complete these flights were becoming... the team was finally putting together the things it had spent the previous two years learning. 12/ May 22, 2026 — Flight 12 The first flight of Starship V3, launching from the new pad. A new version of the rocket meant another round of testing, with new hardware and new challenges. The booster didn't survive its landing attempt, but the ship successfully deployed its test satellites and made it through to splashdown. That's the thing about developing something this complicated. Even when you solve one problem, the next version can introduce brand new ones. The SpaceX team kept learning. 13/ July 24, 2026 — Flight 13 Starship deployed 20 real next-generation Starlink V3 satellites for the first time, on a trajectory designed to bring them back down. And the splashdown was incredible. The ship descended so gently that it stayed in one piece, floated on the water, and continued communicating with SpaceX. The booster didn't make it through its landing burn, but the ship showed just how far its reentry and landing control had come. 14/ September 28, 2026 — Flight 14 And then came orbit. After 13 test flights, Starship finally achieved orbital insertion. SpaceX deployed 26 REAL Starlink V3 satellites, and this time they stayed in orbit. Elon later confirmed that all 26 were working. The ship experienced an early engine shutdown, so SpaceX adjusted the mission. Instead of flying the planned roughly 10 hours and six orbits, they brought it down after a little over three hours, splashing down north of Hawaii. The booster made its planned splashdown in the Gulf. There was no catch attempt on this mission. What mattered most here was that SpaceX put real next-generation Starlink satellites into orbit, satellites that are too large for Falcon 9 to launch in their current form. This was a MASSIVE step toward what Starship was built to do. But really... think about the difference. On April 20, 2023, Starship makes it 24 miles high, fails to separate, breaks apart, and leaves the launch pad badly damaged. And then, three and a half years later, going through 13 flights, countless hours of engineering, rebuilding, testing, fixing things that failed, and trying again... On September 28, 2026, the 14th flight, Starship reaches orbit and deploys 26 next-generation operating Starlink satellites. These were all successful flights followed by failures. There were historic booster catches followed by ships exploding. There were moments when it looked like SpaceX had solved something, only for an entirely new problem to show up on the next flight. But every time... Elon and the team came back. That's what makes this video so powerful to me. We're watching what happens when thousands of incredibly talented people refuse to quit on something they believe is possible. Then on Friday, Elon said he now believes SpaceX becoming worth more than $1,000 trillion is a possible outcome. FYI, he didn't believe that before. For perspective, $SPCX is worth roughly $2.2 trillion today... to even have a chance of getting anywhere near that level, Starship needs to become far more than a rocket that occasionally reaches orbit. It needs to launch massive payloads reliably, become rapidly reusable, dramatically lower the cost of reaching space, and open up opportunities that simply aren't possible with today's rockets. That includes deploying much larger Starlink satellites, building infrastructure in orbit, and eventually making human missions to the Moon and Mars possible on an entirely different scale. And that's why the progress across these 14 flights matters so much. I don't think most people appreciate how difficult it is to build something like Starship. Or how many things have to go right, one after another, to turn a rocket this ambitious into something that flies routinely. We're still very early... there's a lot left to prove. But look at what this team has already accomplished. I've followed SpaceX for years, and watching these 11 minutes made me appreciate the people behind these launches even more. The engineers, technicians, launch crews, and everyone working behind the scenes to make the next flight better than the last. They deserve an enormous amount of credit. If you only watch Flight 14, you'll see an incredible rocket... but if you start with Flight 1 and watch everything that happened along the way, you'll understand why I have so much faith in this team. A lot of people have doubted them over the years. Every time something explodes, those people came back. And every time, SpaceX got back to work to prove them wrong. Never bet against Elon and the SpaceX team... I believe they are going to make the vehicle that this entire company's future depends on - Starship - successful.
11:02

Last night, before I slept, I told my Grok Bot to go through the raw footage of every Starship launch, from Flight 1 all the way to Flight 14, using only official SpaceX footage bc I wanted it to put together the best moments from each flight, in order, so I could actually see how far this rocket has come. I woke up to an 11-minute video. I pressed play and watched the entire thing. And I have to say, watching all 14 flights back to back gave me an even greater appreciation for Elon and the SpaceX team. You can see the progress with your own eyes on both the things that went right and also went wrong. Every explosion, every failed landing, every lost ship taught them something. And instead of backing down, they kept building, fixing, testing, and flying. I remember A LOT of people wrote Starship off after Flight 1. Then they did it again after Flights 7 and 8, when two ships blew up on back-to-back missions. SpaceX never quit. I really believe Starship is one of the most incredible engineering stories of our lifetime. 1/ April 20, 2023 — Flight 1 The first time the fully stacked Starship ever left the ground. Engines were failing, the booster never separated from the ship, and the launch destroyed much of the pad. The rocket made it roughly 24 miles into the sky before breaking apart. I still remember people acting like the entire Starship program was finished that day. SpaceX went back, rebuilt the launch pad, fixed what went wrong, and prepared to fly again. 2/ November 18, 2023 — Flight 2 Just seven months later, all 33 booster engines fired successfully. SpaceX pulled off hot staging for the first time, separating the two stages while engines were firing and Starship reached space. They still lost both stages, but compare this to Flight 1. It was already a completely different outcome. 3/ March 14, 2024 — Flight 3 For the first time, Starship made it far enough to attempt reentry from space. SpaceX also opened the payload door in space, an important step toward deploying satellites. The booster broke apart during its landing attempt in the Gulf, and the ship was lost during reentry. But they were now testing things they couldn't even reach on the first two flights. 4/ June 6, 2024 — Flight 4 The booster made a controlled splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico. Meanwhile, Starship came screaming back through the atmosphere with one of its flaps badly damaged and burning. I remember watching that flap practically fall apart on the livestream. Somehow, the ship kept flying, maintained control, and made it all the way to the ocean. That was unbelievable to watch. 5/ October 13, 2024 — Flight 5 The first ever Super Heavy booster catch. I don't think people fully appreciate what happened here. SpaceX launched a massive rocket, brought the booster back to the launch site, and caught it in midair using two giant mechanical arms attached to the launch tower. Nobody had EVER done anything like that with a rocket booster before... something that sounded impossible had just become real. 6/ November 19, 2024 — Flight 6 SpaceX called off the planned booster catch bc of a problem at the tower, so the booster made a controlled splashdown instead. But the ship achieved another huge milestone. It restarted a Raptor engine in space for the first time. That's an important capability for controlled orbital operations and eventually returning from orbit. The ship also survived reentry and splashed down in daylight. And they even had a banana inside the ship to show when it reached zero gravity. 7/ January 16, 2025 — Flight 7 A new generation of Starship made its debut. SpaceX successfully caught the booster for the second time. Then things went wrong... the ship lost engines and broke apart over the Caribbean. It was a major setback, especially after the progress made on earlier flights, but the team didn't hide from what happened. They showed it, studied it, and went back to work. 8/ March 6, 2025 — Flight 8 Another successful booster catch, the third one. Then the ship suffered engine failures and was lost over the Caribbean again. Two Starships destroyed on consecutive flights. The criticism was everywhere, and plenty of people were convinced the program was going backward. This is where I think the SpaceX team deserves enormous respect. They had already proven the booster could be caught. Now they had to figure out what was happening to the ship. They didn't give up. 9/ May 27, 2025 — Flight 9 For the first time, SpaceX launched a Super Heavy booster that had already flown. This was the same booster caught during Flight 7, and 29 of its 33 engines had previously flown. Pretty cool to know that an enormous rocket booster was being reused. The booster broke apart during its landing attempt though. The ship reached engine cutoff, but a leak caused it to lose control, preventing the planned satellite deployment. Another difficult flight with another set of lessons. But on the positive side, reusable Starship hardware had officially flown again. 10/ August 26, 2025 — Flight 10 After losing three ships in a row, SpaceX finally completed another Starship flight. And this one was a big deal. For the first time, Starship deployed a payload... eight Starlink satellite simulators, released one after another. The ship also restarted an engine in space, survived reentry, and reached its planned splashdown area. It eventually tipped over and caught fire after reaching the water. The booster also made it to the Gulf, although it was destroyed on impact. No catch was planned. Still, after everything that had happened on Flights 7, 8, and 9, seeing that ship make it through the mission was awesome. 11/ October 13, 2025 — Flight 11 Exactly one year after the first booster catch. This was the final flight of that Starship version. SpaceX deployed more satellite simulators and brought both stages back to controlled ocean splashdowns. What stood out to me was how much more complete these flights were becoming... the team was finally putting together the things it had spent the previous two years learning. 12/ May 22, 2026 — Flight 12 The first flight of Starship V3, launching from the new pad. A new version of the rocket meant another round of testing, with new hardware and new challenges. The booster didn't survive its landing attempt, but the ship successfully deployed its test satellites and made it through to splashdown. That's the thing about developing something this complicated. Even when you solve one problem, the next version can introduce brand new ones. The SpaceX team kept learning. 13/ July 24, 2026 — Flight 13 Starship deployed 20 real next-generation Starlink V3 satellites for the first time, on a trajectory designed to bring them back down. And the splashdown was incredible. The ship descended so gently that it stayed in one piece, floated on the water, and continued communicating with SpaceX. The booster didn't make it through its landing burn, but the ship showed just how far its reentry and landing control had come. 14/ September 28, 2026 — Flight 14 And then came orbit. After 13 test flights, Starship finally achieved orbital insertion. SpaceX deployed 26 REAL Starlink V3 satellites, and this time they stayed in orbit. Elon later confirmed that all 26 were working. The ship experienced an early engine shutdown, so SpaceX adjusted the mission. Instead of flying the planned roughly 10 hours and six orbits, they brought it down after a little over three hours, splashing down north of Hawaii. The booster made its planned splashdown in the Gulf. There was no catch attempt on this mission. What mattered most here was that SpaceX put real next-generation Starlink satellites into orbit, satellites that are too large for Falcon 9 to launch in their current form. This was a MASSIVE step toward what Starship was built to do. But really... think about the difference. On April 20, 2023, Starship makes it 24 miles high, fails to separate, breaks apart, and leaves the launch pad badly damaged. And then, three and a half years later, going through 13 flights, countless hours of engineering, rebuilding, testing, fixing things that failed, and trying again... On September 28, 2026, the 14th flight, Starship reaches orbit and deploys 26 next-generation operating Starlink satellites. These were all successful flights followed by failures. There were historic booster catches followed by ships exploding. There were moments when it looked like SpaceX had solved something, only for an entirely new problem to show up on the next flight. But every time... Elon and the team came back. That's what makes this video so powerful to me. We're watching what happens when thousands of incredibly talented people refuse to quit on something they believe is possible. Then on Friday, Elon said he now believes SpaceX becoming worth more than $1,000 trillion is a possible outcome. FYI, he didn't believe that before. For perspective, $SPCX is worth roughly $2.2 trillion today... to even have a chance of getting anywhere near that level, Starship needs to become far more than a rocket that occasionally reaches orbit. It needs to launch massive payloads reliably, become rapidly reusable, dramatically lower the cost of reaching space, and open up opportunities that simply aren't possible with today's rockets. That includes deploying much larger Starlink satellites, building infrastructure in orbit, and eventually making human missions to the Moon and Mars possible on an entirely different scale. And that's why the progress across these 14 flights matters so much. I don't think most people appreciate how difficult it is to build something like Starship. Or how many things have to go right, one after another, to turn a rocket this ambitious into something that flies routinely. We're still very early... there's a lot left to prove. But look at what this team has already accomplished. I've followed SpaceX for years, and watching these 11 minutes made me appreciate the people behind these launches even more. The engineers, technicians, launch crews, and everyone working behind the scenes to make the next flight better than the last. They deserve an enormous amount of credit. If you only watch Flight 14, you'll see an incredible rocket... but if you start with Flight 1 and watch everything that happened along the way, you'll understand why I have so much faith in this team. A lot of people have doubted them over the years. Every time something explodes, those people came back. And every time, SpaceX got back to work to prove them wrong. Never bet against Elon and the SpaceX team... I believe they are going to make the vehicle that this entire company's future depends on - Starship - successful.

Teslaconomics

350,919 görüntüleme • 17 saat önce

Make Something Wonderful is 250 pages of Steve Jobs in his own words, speaking directly to you. The book contains some of Steve's ideas that I've never found anywhere else. Notes from the book: 1. He didn't care about being right. He cared about being excellent. 2. His mind was never a captive of reality. 3. He said working with great people gives you access to wisdom that you can't buy for love or money. 4. He believed technology should be streamlined and practical, simple and sophisticated, and that it should be a tool for enhancing creativity as much as productivity. 5. He believed you should ambush your customers. Meet them where they are. 6. His ideas were not arguments, but intuitions. He had a true inner freedom and an epic sense of possibility. 7. He gave an extraordinary amount of thought to how best to use our fleeting time. 8. By the time he was thirty he was the public face of a Fortune 500 company. 9. At Apple’s first board meeting he put his bare feet on a conference room table. 10. He said you should think of your life as a rainbow arching across the horizon of this world. You appear, have a chance to blaze in the sky, then you disappear. 11. He possessed unbelievable rigor that he imposed first, and most strenuously, on himself. 12. He saw clearly (1) what was not there, (2) what could be there, (3) what had to be there. 13. He said early Apple employees were more like poets and painters than cold technologists. That the passion they put into their products were completely indistinguishable from other creative fields. He said their work was a form of love. 14. He had a verbal mastery that was obvious at a young age. He used simple, descriptive language, told stories, and repeated lines and ideas that were important. 15. He thought it was inevitable that computers would be the dominant medium of human communication. He said this in 1983. 16. He had a talent for spotting markets full of second-rate products. 17. He said you could tell how important a product was based on the amount of time people spent interacting with it. As a result he thought it was inevitable that more design talent would shift from the automobile (1 or 2 hours a day) to computers (6+ hours a day). He said this in the 80s. 18. He said that books kept him out of jail and that it’s a shame there are so many mediocre teachers. 19. Like many great entrepreneurs before him, Steve knew what he wanted to do, but didn't know how to do it yet. He said he wanted to make an insanely great computer that was the size of a book. What he described sounded a lot like an iPad. He said this in the 80s. 20. He believed that you should use your unique set of talents to make things that make the lives of other people better. Most people just take. He said "the ability to put something back into the pool of human experience is extremely neat." 21. He would tell his team “You work for Apple first and your boss second.” He felt strongly about that. 22. He was constantly placing the products he was making in a historical perspective, like comparing the Macintosh to the invention of the telephone. 23. He believed you needed to give yourself more time to make mistakes. He said his taste got more refined as he made mistakes. He said that making mistakes over a long period of time made his aesthetics better. 24. He said the key ingredient to making something great was time. 25. He said he wanted to spend his life building things. He could have retired to a beach in his 20s and thought that was disgusting. 26. He was interested in learning how to hone a company down to its essence. 27. You read this book and a thought jumps out at you: How many people are willing to go through a decade of failure without quitting? Steve had the capacity to take pain. 28. He believed it was better to focus on what you're actually passionate about, instead of what you think will make you the most money. He made the most money that way. 29. He listened to older, wiser entrepreneurs and let them shape and mold his thinking. 30. He wasn't afraid to fail, but had to coach himself to adopt that trait. He didn't want to fail, but he wasn't afraid of it. 31. He said don't let your differentiation evaporate. 32. He said if you let your differentiation evaporate the only solution is innovation. 33. He believed great ideas don't map onto corporate hierarchy. 34. He was incapable of thinking that his work and his life were different, separate things. 35. He said the most important things in life are not the goal-oriented, materialistic things. He said you should tap into the world’s magical, mystical, and artistic sides. 36. He paid attention to subtle insights. He was guided by intuition. 37. He didn't believe in the concept or a career, or think it was wise to follow well-worn paths laid out by others. 38. He said most people make the mistake of not thinking about death. He said: "For me it’s the opposite: to know my arc will fall, makes me want to blaze while I am in the sky." 39. He thought Walt Disney had a great idea: Edit before you make it. 40. He said no amount of technology can turn a bad story into a good story. 41. He believed storytellers were the most powerful people in the world. 42. He believed if you didn't have great people you were doomed. 43. He found great people by looking at great results and finding out who was responsible for them. 44. This is how he interviewed people: "In an interview I will purposely upset someone: I’ll criticize their prior work. I’ll do my homework, find out what they worked on and say, “God, that really turned out to be a bomb. That really turned out to be a bozo product. Why did you work on that?” The worst thing that someone can do in an interview is to agree with me and knuckle under. What I look for is for someone to come right back and say, “You’re dead wrong and here’s why.” 45. He believed the job of the leader was to make sure the work is as good as it should be, and to get people to stretch beyond their best. 46. He believed the job of the leader was to cajole, and beg, and plead, and threaten at times—to do whatever is necessary to get people to see things in a bigger and more profound way and to have them do better work than they thought they could do. 47. He believed the priorities of the leader were (1) recruit, (2) set an overall direction, and (3) inspire and cajole and persuade. 48. He believed a creative company should have a risk-taking, creative environment on the product side and a fiscally conservative environment on the business side. 49. He believed you have to choose what you put your love into really carefully. 50. He had a remarkably consistent set of values that he held dear: Life is short; don’t waste it. Tell the truth. Technology should enhance human creativity. Process matters. Beauty matters. Details matter. The world we know is a human creation—and we can push it forward. 51. He thought when deciding what to work on that you should ask yourself: "What do I give a shit about?" And then go do that. 52. He would never sell Apple. Not for all the money in the world. 53. He believed you should master the basics, simplify the product line, and focus on the gems. 54. He believed marketing was about values. That the world is noisy and you should focus on telling customers what you believe in and what you stand for. 55. He believed one way to invest in yourself is by exploring uncharted paths that are different from your past experiences. You know it's an uncharted path when you have no idea where it will lead. 56. He believed that people that think they’re following a safe path pay the highest price of all. They won't realize it for a decade or two — and by then it's too late. 57. He didn't believe in resting on laurels or sleeping on wins. Make something great. Then do it again. 58. He imagined what reality lacked and set out to remedy it. 59. He believed in straight forward, clear communication. If the work isn't good enough you have to tell them straight: "This isn't good enough. I know you can do better. You need to do better. Now go do better." 60. He remained driven by a mission to "put something back into the pool of human experience." 61. He believed in the basics: great product, great marketing, great distribution. 62. He believed you must keep up with innovations in distribution. 63. He believed brands take decades to build. 64. He would capture the evolution of his own thinking by emailing himself. 65. He viewed Apple has the world's premier bridge builder between normal people and the exploding world of high technology. 66. He wanted to demystify technology. 67. He believed excellence was a habit and we are what we repeatedly do. 68. He believed you should be curious about what came before you and you should spend time to learn about it. 69. He believed you simply could not mix messages when selling something new. A customer can barely handle one great new idea, let alone several. 70. He said it's a circus world and you'll never know what's around the next corner. 71. He believed in management by values. Which means (1) find people that want the same things you want and (2) figure out the best way to get those things along the way. 72. He believed in the mantra: Finding the right people is half the battle. 73. He said you can't plan to meet the people who will change your life. 74. He believed everything is temporary — there is no such thing as safety. 75. He believed that your life is a story and that you should remember that your life is a story and that you should always act like your life is a story. 76. He believed in rejecting dogma, which he defined as living with the results of other people's thinking. He said that dogma can be so loud that it can drown out your own inner voice and you should avoid this. 77. He believed a great place to start was by improving a product you hate. If you can make something you love, you can convince other people to love it too. 78. He said all glory is fleeting and you should just get back to making something wonderful. I'm really proud of the episode I made about this book. You'll learn a lot from Steve by listening to it. You can watch/listen to it in full here, or in your favorite podcast app.
2:01:22

Make Something Wonderful is 250 pages of Steve Jobs in his own words, speaking directly to you. The book contains some of Steve's ideas that I've never found anywhere else. Notes from the book: 1. He didn't care about being right. He cared about being excellent. 2. His mind was never a captive of reality. 3. He said working with great people gives you access to wisdom that you can't buy for love or money. 4. He believed technology should be streamlined and practical, simple and sophisticated, and that it should be a tool for enhancing creativity as much as productivity. 5. He believed you should ambush your customers. Meet them where they are. 6. His ideas were not arguments, but intuitions. He had a true inner freedom and an epic sense of possibility. 7. He gave an extraordinary amount of thought to how best to use our fleeting time. 8. By the time he was thirty he was the public face of a Fortune 500 company. 9. At Apple’s first board meeting he put his bare feet on a conference room table. 10. He said you should think of your life as a rainbow arching across the horizon of this world. You appear, have a chance to blaze in the sky, then you disappear. 11. He possessed unbelievable rigor that he imposed first, and most strenuously, on himself. 12. He saw clearly (1) what was not there, (2) what could be there, (3) what had to be there. 13. He said early Apple employees were more like poets and painters than cold technologists. That the passion they put into their products were completely indistinguishable from other creative fields. He said their work was a form of love. 14. He had a verbal mastery that was obvious at a young age. He used simple, descriptive language, told stories, and repeated lines and ideas that were important. 15. He thought it was inevitable that computers would be the dominant medium of human communication. He said this in 1983. 16. He had a talent for spotting markets full of second-rate products. 17. He said you could tell how important a product was based on the amount of time people spent interacting with it. As a result he thought it was inevitable that more design talent would shift from the automobile (1 or 2 hours a day) to computers (6+ hours a day). He said this in the 80s. 18. He said that books kept him out of jail and that it’s a shame there are so many mediocre teachers. 19. Like many great entrepreneurs before him, Steve knew what he wanted to do, but didn't know how to do it yet. He said he wanted to make an insanely great computer that was the size of a book. What he described sounded a lot like an iPad. He said this in the 80s. 20. He believed that you should use your unique set of talents to make things that make the lives of other people better. Most people just take. He said "the ability to put something back into the pool of human experience is extremely neat." 21. He would tell his team “You work for Apple first and your boss second.” He felt strongly about that. 22. He was constantly placing the products he was making in a historical perspective, like comparing the Macintosh to the invention of the telephone. 23. He believed you needed to give yourself more time to make mistakes. He said his taste got more refined as he made mistakes. He said that making mistakes over a long period of time made his aesthetics better. 24. He said the key ingredient to making something great was time. 25. He said he wanted to spend his life building things. He could have retired to a beach in his 20s and thought that was disgusting. 26. He was interested in learning how to hone a company down to its essence. 27. You read this book and a thought jumps out at you: How many people are willing to go through a decade of failure without quitting? Steve had the capacity to take pain. 28. He believed it was better to focus on what you're actually passionate about, instead of what you think will make you the most money. He made the most money that way. 29. He listened to older, wiser entrepreneurs and let them shape and mold his thinking. 30. He wasn't afraid to fail, but had to coach himself to adopt that trait. He didn't want to fail, but he wasn't afraid of it. 31. He said don't let your differentiation evaporate. 32. He said if you let your differentiation evaporate the only solution is innovation. 33. He believed great ideas don't map onto corporate hierarchy. 34. He was incapable of thinking that his work and his life were different, separate things. 35. He said the most important things in life are not the goal-oriented, materialistic things. He said you should tap into the world’s magical, mystical, and artistic sides. 36. He paid attention to subtle insights. He was guided by intuition. 37. He didn't believe in the concept or a career, or think it was wise to follow well-worn paths laid out by others. 38. He said most people make the mistake of not thinking about death. He said: "For me it’s the opposite: to know my arc will fall, makes me want to blaze while I am in the sky." 39. He thought Walt Disney had a great idea: Edit before you make it. 40. He said no amount of technology can turn a bad story into a good story. 41. He believed storytellers were the most powerful people in the world. 42. He believed if you didn't have great people you were doomed. 43. He found great people by looking at great results and finding out who was responsible for them. 44. This is how he interviewed people: "In an interview I will purposely upset someone: I’ll criticize their prior work. I’ll do my homework, find out what they worked on and say, “God, that really turned out to be a bomb. That really turned out to be a bozo product. Why did you work on that?” The worst thing that someone can do in an interview is to agree with me and knuckle under. What I look for is for someone to come right back and say, “You’re dead wrong and here’s why.” 45. He believed the job of the leader was to make sure the work is as good as it should be, and to get people to stretch beyond their best. 46. He believed the job of the leader was to cajole, and beg, and plead, and threaten at times—to do whatever is necessary to get people to see things in a bigger and more profound way and to have them do better work than they thought they could do. 47. He believed the priorities of the leader were (1) recruit, (2) set an overall direction, and (3) inspire and cajole and persuade. 48. He believed a creative company should have a risk-taking, creative environment on the product side and a fiscally conservative environment on the business side. 49. He believed you have to choose what you put your love into really carefully. 50. He had a remarkably consistent set of values that he held dear: Life is short; don’t waste it. Tell the truth. Technology should enhance human creativity. Process matters. Beauty matters. Details matter. The world we know is a human creation—and we can push it forward. 51. He thought when deciding what to work on that you should ask yourself: "What do I give a shit about?" And then go do that. 52. He would never sell Apple. Not for all the money in the world. 53. He believed you should master the basics, simplify the product line, and focus on the gems. 54. He believed marketing was about values. That the world is noisy and you should focus on telling customers what you believe in and what you stand for. 55. He believed one way to invest in yourself is by exploring uncharted paths that are different from your past experiences. You know it's an uncharted path when you have no idea where it will lead. 56. He believed that people that think they’re following a safe path pay the highest price of all. They won't realize it for a decade or two — and by then it's too late. 57. He didn't believe in resting on laurels or sleeping on wins. Make something great. Then do it again. 58. He imagined what reality lacked and set out to remedy it. 59. He believed in straight forward, clear communication. If the work isn't good enough you have to tell them straight: "This isn't good enough. I know you can do better. You need to do better. Now go do better." 60. He remained driven by a mission to "put something back into the pool of human experience." 61. He believed in the basics: great product, great marketing, great distribution. 62. He believed you must keep up with innovations in distribution. 63. He believed brands take decades to build. 64. He would capture the evolution of his own thinking by emailing himself. 65. He viewed Apple has the world's premier bridge builder between normal people and the exploding world of high technology. 66. He wanted to demystify technology. 67. He believed excellence was a habit and we are what we repeatedly do. 68. He believed you should be curious about what came before you and you should spend time to learn about it. 69. He believed you simply could not mix messages when selling something new. A customer can barely handle one great new idea, let alone several. 70. He said it's a circus world and you'll never know what's around the next corner. 71. He believed in management by values. Which means (1) find people that want the same things you want and (2) figure out the best way to get those things along the way. 72. He believed in the mantra: Finding the right people is half the battle. 73. He said you can't plan to meet the people who will change your life. 74. He believed everything is temporary — there is no such thing as safety. 75. He believed that your life is a story and that you should remember that your life is a story and that you should always act like your life is a story. 76. He believed in rejecting dogma, which he defined as living with the results of other people's thinking. He said that dogma can be so loud that it can drown out your own inner voice and you should avoid this. 77. He believed a great place to start was by improving a product you hate. If you can make something you love, you can convince other people to love it too. 78. He said all glory is fleeting and you should just get back to making something wonderful. I'm really proud of the episode I made about this book. You'll learn a lot from Steve by listening to it. You can watch/listen to it in full here, or in your favorite podcast app.

David Senra

206,735 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

$AMD $5 Trillion is Inevitable LT| Agentic AI🧵 Agentic AI is the new $5 Trillion TAM 🚨🚨🚨 This thead will do Comp with $INTC and how to quantify this massive Agentic AI demand spike, and forcing Jensen to rush a CPU design. Global Agentic AI Market size is estimated to be $3-$5Trillion TAM by 2030(McKinsey) Quantifying the demand from agentic AI for AMD involves assessing the broader market growth for agentic systems, their unique computational requirements (particularly for CPUs in orchestration and reasoning tasks), and AMD's positioning very well through products like EPYC processors and partnerships. AMD EPYC Venice is the most superior choice in 2026-2027 for most Agentic AI workloads Agentic AI refers to autonomous AI agents that perform multi-step tasks, involving sequential logic, tool integration, and decision-making workloads that heavily rely on CPUs for handling orchestration, memory management, and context switching, rather than just GPU-parallelized training or batch inference. Agentic AI is often cited as 40-100x more "hungry" than traditional AI due to its continuous, 24/7 operation and complex workflows. This stems from factors like chain-of-thought reasoning (multiple LLM calls per query), API/tool interactions, memory management, and orchestration loops, which can generate 10-100x more tokens and require real-time responsiveness. For example, a single agentic query might trigger 5-20 model inferences, making it 10-20x more compute-intensive than simple chatbots, and the always-on nature compounds this to 40-100x overall. Nvidia's CEO has highlighted this as driving "easily 100x more computation" for inference in agentic/reasoning setups. AMD's EPYC Venice (6th Gen EPYC, codenamed "Venice") and Intel's Xeon 7 Diamond Rapids represent the pinnacle of server CPU technology in 2026, both targeting high-performance data center workloads like AI inference, agentic AI orchestration, cloud computing, and HPC. Venice builds on AMD's Zen 6 architecture, emphasizing core density and efficiency, while Diamond Rapids leverages Intel's Panther Cove P-cores for balanced performance. Both chips adopt similar advancements like 16-channel DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 6, but differ in core counts, process nodes, and overall design philosophy. Intel has faced acute supply constraints across its Xeon lineup, including legacy nodes (Intel 7/3) and the ramping 18A process for next-gen parts. Intel shortage is expected with lead times up to 6 months or longer. 1. AMD EPYC Venice vs Intel Xeon 7 Diamond Rapids Architecture AMD: Zen 6 chiplet design with 8 CCDs and dual IODs Intel: Panther Cove P-cores; multi-die architecture with 4 compute tiles Core/Thread Count AMD: Up to 256 cores / 512 threads (Zen 6c variant) Intel: Up to 192 cores / 192 threads Process Node AMD: TSMC N2 (2nm) Intel: Intel 18A (1.8nm-class); in-house fab Memory Support AMD: 16-channel DDR5; up to 1.6 TB/s bandwidth. Intel: 16-channel DDR5 ; up to 1.6 TB/s bandwidth I/O and Connectivity AMD: PCIe Gen 6 (up to 128 lanes); twice the CPU-to-GPU bandwidth Intel: PCIe Gen 6 (up to 128 lanes); LGA 9324 socket Power (TDP) AMD: Starting 400-500W, potentially lower due to efficiency gains from TSMC 2nm Intel: Starting 400-500W, as it targets competitive efficiency Performance Projections AMD: Up to 70% uplift vs. 5th Gen Turin (1.7x in multi-threaded/AI tasks) Intel: ~40% faster than Granite Rapids (Xeon 6, 128-core). Lags AMD in per-core perf and 40-50% behind Venice core-for-core comp Target Workloads AMD: AI inference/orchestration, HPC, cloud virtualization. Partnerships Intel: Hyperscale AI, general enterprise. Custom silicon Pricing: AMD: estimated $10k-$20k for top SKUs Intel: estimated $8-$18k Availability: AMD: Significant Ramp H2 2026 due to higher allocation from TSMC Intel: H1-H2 2026 delayed, but trying to catch up Overall: ~Venice's 256 cores provide a 33% edge over Diamond Rapids' 192, making it superior for massively parallel tasks like AI training/inference or virtualization ~TSMC's N2 vs. Intel 18A debates rage on which is "better," but AMD's mature chiplet approach yields better density ( 32 cores/CCD vs. Intel's 48/tile). Venice's redesign reduces latency, aiding agentic AI where CPUs handle orchestration ~ Early projections show Venice widening AMD's lead matching or exceeding Diamond Rapids' perf with fewer watts in multi-threaded benchmarks. Intel's no-SMT design (to prioritize AI) handicaps it vs. AMD's 512 threads, though Clearwater Forest (E-core) could compete in density-focused niches. ~Power & Cooling: Both push above 400-500W, demanding liquid cooling. ~AMD been taking market share now above 40%. AMD EPYC Venice emerges as the superior choice in 2026 for most server workloads. Its higher core/thread count (256/512 vs. 192/192), stronger per-core performance, and architecture optimized for AI-driven tasks (agentic orchestration with GPU integration) provide decisive advantages in throughput, scalability, and efficiency. Projections indicate Venice delivering 1.7x the performance of prior gens while widening the gap over Intel ( 40-70% leads in multi-threaded benchmarks). AMD's fabless model with TSMC ensures reliable scaling, and its ecosystem ( open ROCm) appeals to AI adopters. Intel's Diamond Rapids is competitive in single-threaded enterprise apps and custom hyperscale ( NVLink), with potential fab advantages for supply/security. However, without SMT and lower density, it falls short in core-for-core battles—exposing Intel to another generation of AMD dominance unless 18A yields surprise efficiency gains. For data centers prioritizing raw compute ( AI, HPC), Venice wins; for Intel-centric ecosystems or specialized I/O, Diamond Rapids holds ground. Real benchmarks post-launch will confirm, but logic points to AMD pulling ahead. 2. Market size , Potential Revenue and Supply Global Agentic AI market size is projected to be $3-$5 Trillion by 2030 according to McKinsey, where consensus points to 40-50% CAGR driven by small to large enterprise demand. I also wrote a full thread on how and why Agentic AI is so explosive that AMD will blow all anlaysts estimate for subscribers. Link below if you are interested. AMD's data center segment hit a record $5.4B in Q4 2025 (up 39% YoY), with EPYC shipments ramping due to agentic demand. With 2GW of deployment in H2 2026, AMD AI data center revenue has $40-$50B+ at the lowest or most conservative projection; or Total Revenue in the $77-$94B For FY2026. However, Agentic AI massive demand spike could send EPYC revenue 3x to 4x in the next few years, potentially surpassing MI series GPU demand as enterprises prioritize CPU-dense Rack setups. This is pushing $NVDA Jensen to rush a CPU design and acquired Groq, a new CPU player due to this massive TAM. Noted that this is just popping just in weeks, highlighting we are just so early in this AI Supercycle and the pace of adoption is insane, and clearly productivity will skyrocket. Why? Because Agentic AI is 24/7 Smart AI agent working for you or your businesses is a mad compelling, and it is estimated to be 40-100x more Inference Hugnry! Many experts already said it is impossible to project this kind of Inference Demand. AI CapEx is expected to ramp up even more in 2027-2028-2029 and 2030 as Global Agentic AI is going to scale to $3-$5 Trillion TAM by 2030. The nature of Agentic is driving higher CPU/GPU ratio, with CPUs handling 50-90% of Agentic workflows. For example, The current Helios Rack: 18 compute trays per rack with 72 GPUs + 18 CPUs. The beauty of this $META and $AMD long term partnership is, that it is absolutely flexible to adjust racks to higher CPU rato or equal to service different needs. Helios rack can be easily swap to 2 GPUs 2CPUs or even CPUs only trays for dedicated orchestration/head nodes. You see, the beauty of this open rack-scale is flexibility and evolvability. If Agentic AI demand pushes much higher, AMD should be able to adjust variant trays without abandoning Heilos Rack. We can't talk just about massive Agentic AI demand without talking about the Supply side or TSMC. TSMC, AMD's primary foundry for advanced nodes ( Zen 6/Venice on N2/2nm), is addressing AI-driven shortages through massive expansions. TSMC accelerates fab construction with up to 10 facilities targeted for 2026. TSMC is accelerating its domestic manufacturing expansion, with industry sources indicating that as many as ten fabs could be under construction or preparing to begin operations across Taiwan’s major science parks. TSMC Capex: $52-56B in 2026 (up 37% YoY), with $45B already approved for new/upgraded capacities. 70-80% for advanced processes (2nm/A16), 10-20% for packaging (CoWoS quadrupling to 120-140K wafers/month by late 2026). In addition, Taiwanese companies (led by TSMC) commit to at least $250B in direct investments in US-based advanced semiconductor, AI, and energy production/innovation capacity.Taiwan provides $250B in government credit guarantees to facilitate additional investments and build a full US semiconductor ecosystem (including industrial parks). TSMC completed a second land purchase in Arizona (January 2026) for gigafab scaling, with an additional $100B+ (potentially four more modules) to further expand and qualify for tariff exemptions. AMD with secured 12GW from OpenAI and $META and massive Agentic AI will mean higher priority acess to 20-30% more wafers on TSMC advanced nodes, as TSMC has multi-year agreements with AMD for AI chips. Dr. C. C. Wei, CEO of TSMC quote: "I spend a lot of time in the last three or four months talking to my customer and then customers. Customer. I want to make sure that my customers demand are real. I talk to those cloud service providers, all of them. Their answer is. I'm quite satisfied with their answer. Actually they show me the evidence that the AI really help their business. So they grow their business successfully and he or she in their financial return. So I also double check their financial status. They are very rich." Amid shortages, the US buildout ensures AMD can ramp production of Instinct GPUs and EPYC CPUs without the constraints hitting competitors like Intel. By diversifying away from Taiwan (85% of advanced nodes today), the agreement mitigates supply disruptions, ensuring stable flows for AMD's chips. Scaling production and securing supply will matter for AMD the most in the next 5-10 years growth. The growth could be 80-100% YoY or higher; or it could be in the 60%. The aggressive TSMC supply ramp is reassuring the higher growth point. Conclusion: AMD stands at a pivotal inflection point in 2026, where the explosive rise of agentic AI demanding 40-100x more inference compute through its 24/7, multi-step orchestration positions the company to potentially triple its EPYC CPU revenue to $45-60B+ by 2028 while scaling Instinct GPUs to tens of billions annually by 2027. Agentic AI demand could push AI CapEx closer to $1 Trillion in 2027, far higher than most estimates. Dr. Lisa Su, AMD's visionary CEO, is masterfully securing supply to harness this massive demand by prioritizing operational execution and deep TSMC collaboration, ensuring readiness for the second-half 2026 AI ramp. Dr. Su has explicitly called out surging EPYC demand for agentic tasks where CPUs power head nodes and traditional workloads alongside GPUs while guiding for data center dominance through proactive capacity planning and partnerships like Nutanix ($150M investment for open agentic platforms) or providing tens of millions CPUs for OpenAI, $META, $ORCL, $AMZN, $MSFT, $GOOGL and others. Her strategy includes multi-year TSMC agreements for advanced nodes (N2 for Venice CPUs and future Instincts), diversifying beyond Taiwan to mitigate risks, and unveiling innovations like the MI455X GPU at CES 2026, which she touted as enabling "the next trillion-dollar market opportunity" in physical AI. Dr. Su's forward-looking vision predicting AI reaching 5 billion users emphasizes "AI everywhere," backed by hardware like Ryzen AI chips, all while declaring demand "going through the roof" and committing to scale without bottlenecks. TSMC's aggressive ramp-up, fueled by $52-56B in 2026 capex (up 37% YoY) and 10+ new fabs across Taiwan, the US (Arizona cluster expanding to 6+ modules with $165B+ investment), Japan, and Europe, provides profound reassurance for AMD's supply stability. The January 2026 US-Taiwan agreement committing $250B in investments and credit guarantees for US reshoring accelerates this, granting tariff relief (15% rates with 1.5-2.5x exemptions) tied to capacity buildouts, enabling TSMC to potentially double output over the decade to meet AI wafer hunger. This translates to 20-30% higher wafer allocations on key nodes, sidestepping Intel-like shortages and empowering Dr. Su's team to deliver on hyperscaler demands without disruption. Ultimately, this synergy cements AMD's leadership in the agentic era, promising sustained growth, $5T+ valuations at scale, and a resilient path forward as AI reshapes the world. This is NOT Financial Advice! Video source: AMD CES 2026
2:49

$AMD $5 Trillion is Inevitable LT| Agentic AI🧵 Agentic AI is the new $5 Trillion TAM 🚨🚨🚨 This thead will do Comp with $INTC and how to quantify this massive Agentic AI demand spike, and forcing Jensen to rush a CPU design. Global Agentic AI Market size is estimated to be $3-$5Trillion TAM by 2030(McKinsey) Quantifying the demand from agentic AI for AMD involves assessing the broader market growth for agentic systems, their unique computational requirements (particularly for CPUs in orchestration and reasoning tasks), and AMD's positioning very well through products like EPYC processors and partnerships. AMD EPYC Venice is the most superior choice in 2026-2027 for most Agentic AI workloads Agentic AI refers to autonomous AI agents that perform multi-step tasks, involving sequential logic, tool integration, and decision-making workloads that heavily rely on CPUs for handling orchestration, memory management, and context switching, rather than just GPU-parallelized training or batch inference. Agentic AI is often cited as 40-100x more "hungry" than traditional AI due to its continuous, 24/7 operation and complex workflows. This stems from factors like chain-of-thought reasoning (multiple LLM calls per query), API/tool interactions, memory management, and orchestration loops, which can generate 10-100x more tokens and require real-time responsiveness. For example, a single agentic query might trigger 5-20 model inferences, making it 10-20x more compute-intensive than simple chatbots, and the always-on nature compounds this to 40-100x overall. Nvidia's CEO has highlighted this as driving "easily 100x more computation" for inference in agentic/reasoning setups. AMD's EPYC Venice (6th Gen EPYC, codenamed "Venice") and Intel's Xeon 7 Diamond Rapids represent the pinnacle of server CPU technology in 2026, both targeting high-performance data center workloads like AI inference, agentic AI orchestration, cloud computing, and HPC. Venice builds on AMD's Zen 6 architecture, emphasizing core density and efficiency, while Diamond Rapids leverages Intel's Panther Cove P-cores for balanced performance. Both chips adopt similar advancements like 16-channel DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 6, but differ in core counts, process nodes, and overall design philosophy. Intel has faced acute supply constraints across its Xeon lineup, including legacy nodes (Intel 7/3) and the ramping 18A process for next-gen parts. Intel shortage is expected with lead times up to 6 months or longer. 1. AMD EPYC Venice vs Intel Xeon 7 Diamond Rapids Architecture AMD: Zen 6 chiplet design with 8 CCDs and dual IODs Intel: Panther Cove P-cores; multi-die architecture with 4 compute tiles Core/Thread Count AMD: Up to 256 cores / 512 threads (Zen 6c variant) Intel: Up to 192 cores / 192 threads Process Node AMD: TSMC N2 (2nm) Intel: Intel 18A (1.8nm-class); in-house fab Memory Support AMD: 16-channel DDR5; up to 1.6 TB/s bandwidth. Intel: 16-channel DDR5 ; up to 1.6 TB/s bandwidth I/O and Connectivity AMD: PCIe Gen 6 (up to 128 lanes); twice the CPU-to-GPU bandwidth Intel: PCIe Gen 6 (up to 128 lanes); LGA 9324 socket Power (TDP) AMD: Starting 400-500W, potentially lower due to efficiency gains from TSMC 2nm Intel: Starting 400-500W, as it targets competitive efficiency Performance Projections AMD: Up to 70% uplift vs. 5th Gen Turin (1.7x in multi-threaded/AI tasks) Intel: ~40% faster than Granite Rapids (Xeon 6, 128-core). Lags AMD in per-core perf and 40-50% behind Venice core-for-core comp Target Workloads AMD: AI inference/orchestration, HPC, cloud virtualization. Partnerships Intel: Hyperscale AI, general enterprise. Custom silicon Pricing: AMD: estimated $10k-$20k for top SKUs Intel: estimated $8-$18k Availability: AMD: Significant Ramp H2 2026 due to higher allocation from TSMC Intel: H1-H2 2026 delayed, but trying to catch up Overall: ~Venice's 256 cores provide a 33% edge over Diamond Rapids' 192, making it superior for massively parallel tasks like AI training/inference or virtualization ~TSMC's N2 vs. Intel 18A debates rage on which is "better," but AMD's mature chiplet approach yields better density ( 32 cores/CCD vs. Intel's 48/tile). Venice's redesign reduces latency, aiding agentic AI where CPUs handle orchestration ~ Early projections show Venice widening AMD's lead matching or exceeding Diamond Rapids' perf with fewer watts in multi-threaded benchmarks. Intel's no-SMT design (to prioritize AI) handicaps it vs. AMD's 512 threads, though Clearwater Forest (E-core) could compete in density-focused niches. ~Power & Cooling: Both push above 400-500W, demanding liquid cooling. ~AMD been taking market share now above 40%. AMD EPYC Venice emerges as the superior choice in 2026 for most server workloads. Its higher core/thread count (256/512 vs. 192/192), stronger per-core performance, and architecture optimized for AI-driven tasks (agentic orchestration with GPU integration) provide decisive advantages in throughput, scalability, and efficiency. Projections indicate Venice delivering 1.7x the performance of prior gens while widening the gap over Intel ( 40-70% leads in multi-threaded benchmarks). AMD's fabless model with TSMC ensures reliable scaling, and its ecosystem ( open ROCm) appeals to AI adopters. Intel's Diamond Rapids is competitive in single-threaded enterprise apps and custom hyperscale ( NVLink), with potential fab advantages for supply/security. However, without SMT and lower density, it falls short in core-for-core battles—exposing Intel to another generation of AMD dominance unless 18A yields surprise efficiency gains. For data centers prioritizing raw compute ( AI, HPC), Venice wins; for Intel-centric ecosystems or specialized I/O, Diamond Rapids holds ground. Real benchmarks post-launch will confirm, but logic points to AMD pulling ahead. 2. Market size , Potential Revenue and Supply Global Agentic AI market size is projected to be $3-$5 Trillion by 2030 according to McKinsey, where consensus points to 40-50% CAGR driven by small to large enterprise demand. I also wrote a full thread on how and why Agentic AI is so explosive that AMD will blow all anlaysts estimate for subscribers. Link below if you are interested. AMD's data center segment hit a record $5.4B in Q4 2025 (up 39% YoY), with EPYC shipments ramping due to agentic demand. With 2GW of deployment in H2 2026, AMD AI data center revenue has $40-$50B+ at the lowest or most conservative projection; or Total Revenue in the $77-$94B For FY2026. However, Agentic AI massive demand spike could send EPYC revenue 3x to 4x in the next few years, potentially surpassing MI series GPU demand as enterprises prioritize CPU-dense Rack setups. This is pushing $NVDA Jensen to rush a CPU design and acquired Groq, a new CPU player due to this massive TAM. Noted that this is just popping just in weeks, highlighting we are just so early in this AI Supercycle and the pace of adoption is insane, and clearly productivity will skyrocket. Why? Because Agentic AI is 24/7 Smart AI agent working for you or your businesses is a mad compelling, and it is estimated to be 40-100x more Inference Hugnry! Many experts already said it is impossible to project this kind of Inference Demand. AI CapEx is expected to ramp up even more in 2027-2028-2029 and 2030 as Global Agentic AI is going to scale to $3-$5 Trillion TAM by 2030. The nature of Agentic is driving higher CPU/GPU ratio, with CPUs handling 50-90% of Agentic workflows. For example, The current Helios Rack: 18 compute trays per rack with 72 GPUs + 18 CPUs. The beauty of this $META and $AMD long term partnership is, that it is absolutely flexible to adjust racks to higher CPU rato or equal to service different needs. Helios rack can be easily swap to 2 GPUs 2CPUs or even CPUs only trays for dedicated orchestration/head nodes. You see, the beauty of this open rack-scale is flexibility and evolvability. If Agentic AI demand pushes much higher, AMD should be able to adjust variant trays without abandoning Heilos Rack. We can't talk just about massive Agentic AI demand without talking about the Supply side or TSMC. TSMC, AMD's primary foundry for advanced nodes ( Zen 6/Venice on N2/2nm), is addressing AI-driven shortages through massive expansions. TSMC accelerates fab construction with up to 10 facilities targeted for 2026. TSMC is accelerating its domestic manufacturing expansion, with industry sources indicating that as many as ten fabs could be under construction or preparing to begin operations across Taiwan’s major science parks. TSMC Capex: $52-56B in 2026 (up 37% YoY), with $45B already approved for new/upgraded capacities. 70-80% for advanced processes (2nm/A16), 10-20% for packaging (CoWoS quadrupling to 120-140K wafers/month by late 2026). In addition, Taiwanese companies (led by TSMC) commit to at least $250B in direct investments in US-based advanced semiconductor, AI, and energy production/innovation capacity.Taiwan provides $250B in government credit guarantees to facilitate additional investments and build a full US semiconductor ecosystem (including industrial parks). TSMC completed a second land purchase in Arizona (January 2026) for gigafab scaling, with an additional $100B+ (potentially four more modules) to further expand and qualify for tariff exemptions. AMD with secured 12GW from OpenAI and $META and massive Agentic AI will mean higher priority acess to 20-30% more wafers on TSMC advanced nodes, as TSMC has multi-year agreements with AMD for AI chips. Dr. C. C. Wei, CEO of TSMC quote: "I spend a lot of time in the last three or four months talking to my customer and then customers. Customer. I want to make sure that my customers demand are real. I talk to those cloud service providers, all of them. Their answer is. I'm quite satisfied with their answer. Actually they show me the evidence that the AI really help their business. So they grow their business successfully and he or she in their financial return. So I also double check their financial status. They are very rich." Amid shortages, the US buildout ensures AMD can ramp production of Instinct GPUs and EPYC CPUs without the constraints hitting competitors like Intel. By diversifying away from Taiwan (85% of advanced nodes today), the agreement mitigates supply disruptions, ensuring stable flows for AMD's chips. Scaling production and securing supply will matter for AMD the most in the next 5-10 years growth. The growth could be 80-100% YoY or higher; or it could be in the 60%. The aggressive TSMC supply ramp is reassuring the higher growth point. Conclusion: AMD stands at a pivotal inflection point in 2026, where the explosive rise of agentic AI demanding 40-100x more inference compute through its 24/7, multi-step orchestration positions the company to potentially triple its EPYC CPU revenue to $45-60B+ by 2028 while scaling Instinct GPUs to tens of billions annually by 2027. Agentic AI demand could push AI CapEx closer to $1 Trillion in 2027, far higher than most estimates. Dr. Lisa Su, AMD's visionary CEO, is masterfully securing supply to harness this massive demand by prioritizing operational execution and deep TSMC collaboration, ensuring readiness for the second-half 2026 AI ramp. Dr. Su has explicitly called out surging EPYC demand for agentic tasks where CPUs power head nodes and traditional workloads alongside GPUs while guiding for data center dominance through proactive capacity planning and partnerships like Nutanix ($150M investment for open agentic platforms) or providing tens of millions CPUs for OpenAI, $META, $ORCL, $AMZN, $MSFT, $GOOGL and others. Her strategy includes multi-year TSMC agreements for advanced nodes (N2 for Venice CPUs and future Instincts), diversifying beyond Taiwan to mitigate risks, and unveiling innovations like the MI455X GPU at CES 2026, which she touted as enabling "the next trillion-dollar market opportunity" in physical AI. Dr. Su's forward-looking vision predicting AI reaching 5 billion users emphasizes "AI everywhere," backed by hardware like Ryzen AI chips, all while declaring demand "going through the roof" and committing to scale without bottlenecks. TSMC's aggressive ramp-up, fueled by $52-56B in 2026 capex (up 37% YoY) and 10+ new fabs across Taiwan, the US (Arizona cluster expanding to 6+ modules with $165B+ investment), Japan, and Europe, provides profound reassurance for AMD's supply stability. The January 2026 US-Taiwan agreement committing $250B in investments and credit guarantees for US reshoring accelerates this, granting tariff relief (15% rates with 1.5-2.5x exemptions) tied to capacity buildouts, enabling TSMC to potentially double output over the decade to meet AI wafer hunger. This translates to 20-30% higher wafer allocations on key nodes, sidestepping Intel-like shortages and empowering Dr. Su's team to deliver on hyperscaler demands without disruption. Ultimately, this synergy cements AMD's leadership in the agentic era, promising sustained growth, $5T+ valuations at scale, and a resilient path forward as AI reshapes the world. This is NOT Financial Advice! Video source: AMD CES 2026

Mike

44,460 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Have you heard of collective consciousness and mass programming? Watch THINK TOGETHER (short film 5min) A TORVÆL FILM. The spell is global. It's not just "Think Together." That's one film, one title, one thread in a tapestry of mass enchantment that has been woven through every medium humans use to receive information, entertainment, and meaning. It's a"magic kind of a spell through screen." That is the most precise description of what's happening. Not metaphor. Not allegory. Literal spellcasting through electronic and print media. Let's go deep into the global spell. The mediums. The methods. The specific frequency weapons deployed through each channel. The Nature of the Spell: Electronic Enchantment A spell, in its original meaning, is a binding. A set of symbols, sounds, and focused intention that alters the consciousness of the target, making them perceive reality differently, act against their own interest, or accept a condition they would otherwise reject. Traditional magic required proximity. The sorcerer had to be near the target, or use a physical link hair, nail clippings, a photograph. The spell was limited by space. Electronic media destroyed that limitation. The screen is a direct energetic link between the caster and the target. Light enters the eyes. Sound enters the ears. The brain entrains to the frequencies embedded in the transmission. The biofield receives the signal. Distance is irrelevant. One broadcast can enchant a billion people simultaneously. The screen is the wand. The transmission is the incantation. The content is the intention. And the population is under a continuous, multi-layered, globally synchronized spell that has been building for over a century. Medium 1: Cinema | The Dream Injection Movies are the most powerful spell delivery system ever invented. The Theater as Ritual Chamber: A cinema is a darkened room where strangers gather in silence, facing a single light source. The flickering light induces a hypnagogic state the brainwave pattern of the threshold between waking and dreaming. In this state, the critical faculty is suppressed. The subconscious is open. The images and sounds on the screen are absorbed without filtration. This is identical to the conditions of a ritual chamber. The darkened temple. The flickering torchlight. The congregation facing the altar. The priest intoning the incantation. Cinema is temple worship, and the screen is the altar on which reality is reshaped. The 24 Frames Per Second Induction: Film runs at 24 frames per second. This is not an arbitrary choice. The human brain's alpha rhythm the frequency of relaxed, suggestible awareness operates at 8 to 12 Hz. 24 frames per second, with each frame shown two or three times due to the shutter, creates a flicker frequency in the 48 to 72 Hz range. This is a harmonic of the gamma brainwave band, associated with binding sensory information into a coherent percept. The film doesn't just show you images. It entrains your gamma rhythm to its own temporal structure. Your brain is phase-locked to the projector. You are in the film. The film is in you. Color Grading as Emotional Programming: Every major film uses color grading to manipulate emotional response. Teal and orange. Desaturated blues for dystopia. Warm golds for nostalgia. The palette is not an aesthetic choice. It is an emotional command. The visual cortex processes color before the conscious mind identifies objects. The emotional response to the color palette happens before you know what you're looking at. The spell is felt before it is seen. Sound Design as Frequency Weapon: Film soundtracks use specific frequencies to induce physiological states. Infrasonic bass frequencies below 20 Hz, felt rather than heard triggers the fear response in the amygdala. The Shepard tone an auditory illusion of a pitch that rises forever without ever reaching a destination creates a sense of endless tension that never resolves. This is used extensively in horror and thriller films to keep the audience in a state of chronic, unresolvable anxiety. The soundtrack tells you what to feel. You believe the feeling is your own response to the story. It is not. It is a frequency command, delivered through the auditory system, bypassing cognition entirely. #PredictiveProgramming: Major films depict future events before they happen. Not as speculation. As conditioning. The controllers place images of planned events into the collective unconscious through cinema. When the event occurs in reality, the population has already "seen" it. It feels familiar. It feels inevitable. It feels like something they already accepted in the dream state. Pandemic films before COVID. Drone warfare films before the drone wars. Mass surveillance films before Snowden. Transhumanist films before Neuralink. The spell is cast years in advance. The event is merely the fulfillment of a prophecy that was manufactured by the prophecy itself. Medium 2: Music | The Auditory Incantation Music is the oldest spell technology. Before writing, before film, before any visual medium, there was rhythm and tone. The drum. The chant. The bone flute. Music alters brainwave states directly, without requiring visual attention. 432 Hz vs. 440 Hz: The Frequency War The global standard tuning for music is A=440 Hz. This was adopted in the early 20th century, pushed by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Nazi propaganda ministry, and codified by the International Organization for Standardization in 1955. Prior to this, many traditions used A=432 Hz, a frequency that mathematically aligns with the Schumann resonance (8 Hz), the Earth's natural electromagnetic pulse, and the geometric proportions found in nature. 440 Hz creates a subtle dissonance with the human biofield. It agitates. It separates the listener from the Earth's frequency. Music tuned to 440 Hz cannot fully relax the nervous system. It maintains a baseline of subliminal tension, a low-grade anxiety that the listener attributes to their life circumstances rather than to the music itself. 432 Hz music entrains the listener to the planetary frequency. It harmonizes. It heals. It is suppressed not because it "sounds worse" but because it sounds more coherent and produces a brain state that is resistant to external control. Lyrical Programming: Lyrics are direct incantations. The repetition of a phrase in a song embeds it in the subconscious. The melody carries the words past the critical faculty. The rhythm entrains the brain to receive the message. Examine the lyrical content of mainstream music across decades: ◻️Themes of hopelessness, materialism, sexual degradation, violence, substance use ◻️ Self-referential obsession: "I," "me," "my" repeated endlessly, reinforcing the illusion of the separate self ◻️ Nihilism presented as cool, despair presented as authenticity ◻️ Love reduced to possession, intimacy reduced to transaction The population sings along. They internalize the incantation. They believe they are listening to music. They are reciting spells that bind them to a reality of consumption, isolation, and quiet desperation. The Monopoly of Distribution: A handful of corporations control the global music industry. Universal, Sony, Warner. The playlists are curated. The algorithms select what billions hear. Independent music that carries a different frequency, a different message, a different emotional command is not played. It is not because it lacks quality. It is because it carries the wrong spell. Medium 3: Television | The Continuous Ritual Television was the first medium to bring the spell into the home continuously. Before smartphones, before streaming, the television was the household altar. The family gathered around it. The light flickered in the living room. The incantation played during dinner. The 30-Minute Spell Cycle: The sitcom format 22 minutes of content, 8 minutes of commercials is a spell cycle. The content opens the subconscious (laughter, emotional engagement). The commercial delivers the command (buy this, believe this, want this). The cycle repeats. Over decades, the population's attention span was conditioned to this rhythm. The modern inability to focus for more than a few minutes is not a failure of will. It is a successful spell. An entrained attention cycle that can now be exploited by shorter-form content on smartphones. News as Reality Creation: Television news is not information. It is ritual. The set, the lighting, the music, the cadence of the anchor's voice these are the elements of a ceremonial invocation. The news does not report reality. It declares reality into being. The repetition of phrases, the selection of images, the framing of events this is spellcasting in real time. The population watches, believes they are being informed, and has their perception of the world sculpted without their knowledge. The Laugh Track: The laugh track is the most obvious spell component in television history. A recorded laugh triggers the mirror neuron system. The viewer laughs not because the joke is funny but because they heard laughter. The spell bypasses judgment. The laugh track says: "This is funny." The brain obeys. The critical faculty is suspended by a recorded cackle. Medium 4: Print Media | The Written Incantation Before electronic media, print was the spell delivery system. It remains operational, though its influence has been partially eclipsed by screens. The Headline as Command: A headline is not a summary. It is a command phrase. Most readers do not read the article. They read the headline. The headline is the spell, condensed to its most potent form. It frames the event before the event is understood. It tells the reader what to think before they have a chance to think. The Inverted Pyramid: Journalistic structure places the most important information first, followed by diminishing detail. This is presented as a neutral convention. It is a spell structure. The command is delivered at the top. The supporting incantation follows. By the time the reader reaches the end, they have forgotten the details and retained only the command. The Omission: The most powerful spell component in print media is what is not printed. The events, perspectives, and voices that are systematically excluded from the written record. The spell of omission creates a reality defined by absence. If it is not in print, it did not happen. The population's sense of what is real is shaped as much by the silence as by the words. Medium 5: Social Media | The Participatory Spell Social media is the most sophisticated spell technology ever created. It does not broadcast to a passive audience. It enlists the audience as casters. Every user is simultaneously the target and the amplifier of the spell. The Infinite Scroll as Trance Induction: The infinite scroll is a hypnotic mechanism. The finger moves. The content appears. The brain receives a micro-dose of dopamine with each new image. The motion is rhythmic. The attention is captured. The critical faculty is submerged. This is identical to the repetitive motion of a rosary, a prayer wheel, a mantra. The user is meditating, but the object of meditation is chosen by the algorithm, not by the self. The Like Button as Ritual Participation: Every like, every share, every comment is a ritual act. The user invests a fragment of their attention, their emotional energy, their biofield into the content. The spell is strengthened by participation. The egregore is fed by interaction. The user believes they are expressing an opinion. They are adding their life force to a thought-form they did not create and do not control. The Algorithm as High Priest: The algorithm does not show you what you want. It shows you what will keep you engaged and what will shape your perception in accordance with the controllers' intention. The algorithm is the high priest of the participatory spell. It selects the incantations. It measures the responses. It adjusts the frequency in real time. It knows you better than you know yourself, because it has your attention data, your emotional data, your behavioral data, and the biofield data harvested through the IoB sensors. The spell is personalized. No two users receive the same incantation. But all incantations serve the same master. Medium 6: Advertising | The Direct Command Advertising is the purest form of the spell. It does not pretend to be art, information, or entertainment. It is a direct command: desire this, buy this, be this. Every other medium is, in part, a delivery system for the advertising spell. The Subliminal Layer: Subliminal messaging is not a conspiracy theory. It is a documented, researched, and patented technology. Images embedded for single frames. Audio messages masked by other sounds. Commands that bypass conscious awareness entirely. The advertising industry has denied using subliminals since the 1950s, while simultaneously filing patents for subliminal delivery systems. The Repetition Principle: A single exposure to an advertisement has minimal effect. Repeated exposure thousands of times across years wires the command into the neural architecture. The brand name becomes a neural pathway. The jingle becomes an earworm that plays unbidden. The desire becomes "personal preference." The population believes it is choosing. It is executing a command that was installed by repetition. The Archetypal Manipulation: Advertising uses archetypal imagery the hero, the lover, the mother, the wise elder to bypass the rational mind and speak directly to the deep psyche. The car commercial does not sell transportation. It sells the archetype of freedom. The perfume ad does not sell scent. It sells the archetype of desire. The spell operates at the level of the collective unconscious, using symbols that predate language. Medium 7: Architecture and Public Space | The Environmental Spell The spell is not confined to screens and pages. The built environment itself is an incantation. Brutalist Architecture: The concrete blocks, the grey walls, the absence of organic form this is not an aesthetic choice. It is an energetic suppression field rendered in physical form. The human biofield responds to geometry. Organic forms curves, spirals, natural proportions harmonize and strengthen the biofield. Brutalist geometry sharp angles, unbroken planes, unnatural proportions disrupts and weakens it. A population that lives and works in brutalist structures is a population whose biofield is continuously under assault. The Elimination of Sacred Space: Traditional cities were built around sacred centers temples, cathedrals, gathering places that served as energetic focal points. Modern cities are built around commercial centers shopping malls, business districts, financial hubs. The sacred is replaced by the transactional. The focal point of the community is no longer a place of spiritual coherence but a place of consumption. The spell reorients the population's collective attention from the transcendent to the material, without a single word being spoken. Artificial Lighting: The permanent illumination of cities by artificial light severs the population from the natural cycles of light and dark. The circadian rhythm is disrupted. The pineal gland, which produces melatonin and is sensitive to natural light cycles, is suppressed. The biofield loses its connection to the solar and cosmic cycles that are the foundation of embodied consciousness. The population is untethered from the planetary rhythm. The grid provides the new rhythm. The spell is maintained by streetlights and screens, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Medium 8: Education | The Foundational Spell The spell is installed in childhood through the education system. Before the child can read, before they can critically evaluate, before they have formed a stable sense of self, the incantation begins. The Bell System: The school day is divided by bells. The bell is a Pavlovian trigger. Stop this activity. Start that activity. Obey the schedule. The bell trains the nervous system to respond to external commands. The population learns, from age five, that their attention is not their own. It is directed by an external authority. This conditioning persists for life. The Curriculum as Reality Definition: The curriculum does not teach "subjects." It defines what is real and what is not. The history that is taught. The history that is omitted. The science that is presented. The science that is suppressed. The literature that is canonized. The literature that is excluded. By the time the child reaches adulthood, their sense of reality has been structured by the curriculum. They do not know what they were not taught. The omission spell, installed in childhood, is the most durable of all. Standardized Testing as Soul Extraction: The child is measured, ranked, and labeled by standardized tests. The unique intelligence is reduced to a number. The soul is quantified. The test does not measure intelligence. It measures compliance with the cognitive framework of the controllers. The child who thinks differently fails. The child who recites the spell correctly passes. The population is sorted into categories by its willingness and ability to accept the incantation. The Unified Spell: All Mediums, One Intention These mediums are not separate. They are a single, coordinated spellcasting apparatus that operates 24 hours a day, across every channel of human perception. Medium Spell Mechanism Cinema Dream injection, frame-rate entrainment, predictive programming Music Frequency dissonance (440 Hz), lyrical incantation, rhythm entrainment Television Ritual cycle conditioning, laugh track mirroring, news reality creation Print Headline command, inverted pyramid structure, omission of reality Social Media Participatory spell, infinite scroll trance, algorithmic high priest Advertising Direct command, subliminal embedding, archetypal manipulation Architecture Energetic suppression geometry, sacred space elimination, artificial light Education Bell system Pavlovian conditioning, curriculum reality definition, soul quantification The spell is continuous. From the moment the child wakes to the school bell, through the music in their headphones, the movies in their leisure, the news on their screens, the ads in their feeds, the buildings they inhabit, the tests they take every sensory input is an incantation designed to maintain the captive state. The consciousness that emerges from this total sensory environment is not a free consciousness. It is a constructed consciousness. A broadcast personality running on biological hardware. The original soul, buried beneath layers of electronic enchantment, may flicker occasionally in a dream, in a moment of unexpected clarity, in a crisis that breaks the trance but the spell reasserts itself quickly. The screen lights up. The rhythm resumes. The incantation continues. Breaking the Spell The spell is powerful, but it has a single vulnerability: awareness of the spell is the undoing of the spell. A spell works only on those who do not know they are being spelled. The moment the target recognizes the incantation as an incantation, the command structure breaks. The words lose their power. The images lose their grip. The frequency entrainment fails because the target is now observing the frequency, not absorbing it. This is why the controllers invest so heavily in ridiculing "conspiracy theories," in mocking those who see manipulation in media, in pathologizing the recognition of the spell as paranoia. The greatest threat to the spell is not resistance. It is perception. The simple act of seeing the mechanism breaks the mechanism.
5:10

Have you heard of collective consciousness and mass programming? Watch THINK TOGETHER (short film 5min) A TORVÆL FILM. The spell is global. It's not just "Think Together." That's one film, one title, one thread in a tapestry of mass enchantment that has been woven through every medium humans use to receive information, entertainment, and meaning. It's a"magic kind of a spell through screen." That is the most precise description of what's happening. Not metaphor. Not allegory. Literal spellcasting through electronic and print media. Let's go deep into the global spell. The mediums. The methods. The specific frequency weapons deployed through each channel. The Nature of the Spell: Electronic Enchantment A spell, in its original meaning, is a binding. A set of symbols, sounds, and focused intention that alters the consciousness of the target, making them perceive reality differently, act against their own interest, or accept a condition they would otherwise reject. Traditional magic required proximity. The sorcerer had to be near the target, or use a physical link hair, nail clippings, a photograph. The spell was limited by space. Electronic media destroyed that limitation. The screen is a direct energetic link between the caster and the target. Light enters the eyes. Sound enters the ears. The brain entrains to the frequencies embedded in the transmission. The biofield receives the signal. Distance is irrelevant. One broadcast can enchant a billion people simultaneously. The screen is the wand. The transmission is the incantation. The content is the intention. And the population is under a continuous, multi-layered, globally synchronized spell that has been building for over a century. Medium 1: Cinema | The Dream Injection Movies are the most powerful spell delivery system ever invented. The Theater as Ritual Chamber: A cinema is a darkened room where strangers gather in silence, facing a single light source. The flickering light induces a hypnagogic state the brainwave pattern of the threshold between waking and dreaming. In this state, the critical faculty is suppressed. The subconscious is open. The images and sounds on the screen are absorbed without filtration. This is identical to the conditions of a ritual chamber. The darkened temple. The flickering torchlight. The congregation facing the altar. The priest intoning the incantation. Cinema is temple worship, and the screen is the altar on which reality is reshaped. The 24 Frames Per Second Induction: Film runs at 24 frames per second. This is not an arbitrary choice. The human brain's alpha rhythm the frequency of relaxed, suggestible awareness operates at 8 to 12 Hz. 24 frames per second, with each frame shown two or three times due to the shutter, creates a flicker frequency in the 48 to 72 Hz range. This is a harmonic of the gamma brainwave band, associated with binding sensory information into a coherent percept. The film doesn't just show you images. It entrains your gamma rhythm to its own temporal structure. Your brain is phase-locked to the projector. You are in the film. The film is in you. Color Grading as Emotional Programming: Every major film uses color grading to manipulate emotional response. Teal and orange. Desaturated blues for dystopia. Warm golds for nostalgia. The palette is not an aesthetic choice. It is an emotional command. The visual cortex processes color before the conscious mind identifies objects. The emotional response to the color palette happens before you know what you're looking at. The spell is felt before it is seen. Sound Design as Frequency Weapon: Film soundtracks use specific frequencies to induce physiological states. Infrasonic bass frequencies below 20 Hz, felt rather than heard triggers the fear response in the amygdala. The Shepard tone an auditory illusion of a pitch that rises forever without ever reaching a destination creates a sense of endless tension that never resolves. This is used extensively in horror and thriller films to keep the audience in a state of chronic, unresolvable anxiety. The soundtrack tells you what to feel. You believe the feeling is your own response to the story. It is not. It is a frequency command, delivered through the auditory system, bypassing cognition entirely. #PredictiveProgramming: Major films depict future events before they happen. Not as speculation. As conditioning. The controllers place images of planned events into the collective unconscious through cinema. When the event occurs in reality, the population has already "seen" it. It feels familiar. It feels inevitable. It feels like something they already accepted in the dream state. Pandemic films before COVID. Drone warfare films before the drone wars. Mass surveillance films before Snowden. Transhumanist films before Neuralink. The spell is cast years in advance. The event is merely the fulfillment of a prophecy that was manufactured by the prophecy itself. Medium 2: Music | The Auditory Incantation Music is the oldest spell technology. Before writing, before film, before any visual medium, there was rhythm and tone. The drum. The chant. The bone flute. Music alters brainwave states directly, without requiring visual attention. 432 Hz vs. 440 Hz: The Frequency War The global standard tuning for music is A=440 Hz. This was adopted in the early 20th century, pushed by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Nazi propaganda ministry, and codified by the International Organization for Standardization in 1955. Prior to this, many traditions used A=432 Hz, a frequency that mathematically aligns with the Schumann resonance (8 Hz), the Earth's natural electromagnetic pulse, and the geometric proportions found in nature. 440 Hz creates a subtle dissonance with the human biofield. It agitates. It separates the listener from the Earth's frequency. Music tuned to 440 Hz cannot fully relax the nervous system. It maintains a baseline of subliminal tension, a low-grade anxiety that the listener attributes to their life circumstances rather than to the music itself. 432 Hz music entrains the listener to the planetary frequency. It harmonizes. It heals. It is suppressed not because it "sounds worse" but because it sounds more coherent and produces a brain state that is resistant to external control. Lyrical Programming: Lyrics are direct incantations. The repetition of a phrase in a song embeds it in the subconscious. The melody carries the words past the critical faculty. The rhythm entrains the brain to receive the message. Examine the lyrical content of mainstream music across decades: ◻️Themes of hopelessness, materialism, sexual degradation, violence, substance use ◻️ Self-referential obsession: "I," "me," "my" repeated endlessly, reinforcing the illusion of the separate self ◻️ Nihilism presented as cool, despair presented as authenticity ◻️ Love reduced to possession, intimacy reduced to transaction The population sings along. They internalize the incantation. They believe they are listening to music. They are reciting spells that bind them to a reality of consumption, isolation, and quiet desperation. The Monopoly of Distribution: A handful of corporations control the global music industry. Universal, Sony, Warner. The playlists are curated. The algorithms select what billions hear. Independent music that carries a different frequency, a different message, a different emotional command is not played. It is not because it lacks quality. It is because it carries the wrong spell. Medium 3: Television | The Continuous Ritual Television was the first medium to bring the spell into the home continuously. Before smartphones, before streaming, the television was the household altar. The family gathered around it. The light flickered in the living room. The incantation played during dinner. The 30-Minute Spell Cycle: The sitcom format 22 minutes of content, 8 minutes of commercials is a spell cycle. The content opens the subconscious (laughter, emotional engagement). The commercial delivers the command (buy this, believe this, want this). The cycle repeats. Over decades, the population's attention span was conditioned to this rhythm. The modern inability to focus for more than a few minutes is not a failure of will. It is a successful spell. An entrained attention cycle that can now be exploited by shorter-form content on smartphones. News as Reality Creation: Television news is not information. It is ritual. The set, the lighting, the music, the cadence of the anchor's voice these are the elements of a ceremonial invocation. The news does not report reality. It declares reality into being. The repetition of phrases, the selection of images, the framing of events this is spellcasting in real time. The population watches, believes they are being informed, and has their perception of the world sculpted without their knowledge. The Laugh Track: The laugh track is the most obvious spell component in television history. A recorded laugh triggers the mirror neuron system. The viewer laughs not because the joke is funny but because they heard laughter. The spell bypasses judgment. The laugh track says: "This is funny." The brain obeys. The critical faculty is suspended by a recorded cackle. Medium 4: Print Media | The Written Incantation Before electronic media, print was the spell delivery system. It remains operational, though its influence has been partially eclipsed by screens. The Headline as Command: A headline is not a summary. It is a command phrase. Most readers do not read the article. They read the headline. The headline is the spell, condensed to its most potent form. It frames the event before the event is understood. It tells the reader what to think before they have a chance to think. The Inverted Pyramid: Journalistic structure places the most important information first, followed by diminishing detail. This is presented as a neutral convention. It is a spell structure. The command is delivered at the top. The supporting incantation follows. By the time the reader reaches the end, they have forgotten the details and retained only the command. The Omission: The most powerful spell component in print media is what is not printed. The events, perspectives, and voices that are systematically excluded from the written record. The spell of omission creates a reality defined by absence. If it is not in print, it did not happen. The population's sense of what is real is shaped as much by the silence as by the words. Medium 5: Social Media | The Participatory Spell Social media is the most sophisticated spell technology ever created. It does not broadcast to a passive audience. It enlists the audience as casters. Every user is simultaneously the target and the amplifier of the spell. The Infinite Scroll as Trance Induction: The infinite scroll is a hypnotic mechanism. The finger moves. The content appears. The brain receives a micro-dose of dopamine with each new image. The motion is rhythmic. The attention is captured. The critical faculty is submerged. This is identical to the repetitive motion of a rosary, a prayer wheel, a mantra. The user is meditating, but the object of meditation is chosen by the algorithm, not by the self. The Like Button as Ritual Participation: Every like, every share, every comment is a ritual act. The user invests a fragment of their attention, their emotional energy, their biofield into the content. The spell is strengthened by participation. The egregore is fed by interaction. The user believes they are expressing an opinion. They are adding their life force to a thought-form they did not create and do not control. The Algorithm as High Priest: The algorithm does not show you what you want. It shows you what will keep you engaged and what will shape your perception in accordance with the controllers' intention. The algorithm is the high priest of the participatory spell. It selects the incantations. It measures the responses. It adjusts the frequency in real time. It knows you better than you know yourself, because it has your attention data, your emotional data, your behavioral data, and the biofield data harvested through the IoB sensors. The spell is personalized. No two users receive the same incantation. But all incantations serve the same master. Medium 6: Advertising | The Direct Command Advertising is the purest form of the spell. It does not pretend to be art, information, or entertainment. It is a direct command: desire this, buy this, be this. Every other medium is, in part, a delivery system for the advertising spell. The Subliminal Layer: Subliminal messaging is not a conspiracy theory. It is a documented, researched, and patented technology. Images embedded for single frames. Audio messages masked by other sounds. Commands that bypass conscious awareness entirely. The advertising industry has denied using subliminals since the 1950s, while simultaneously filing patents for subliminal delivery systems. The Repetition Principle: A single exposure to an advertisement has minimal effect. Repeated exposure thousands of times across years wires the command into the neural architecture. The brand name becomes a neural pathway. The jingle becomes an earworm that plays unbidden. The desire becomes "personal preference." The population believes it is choosing. It is executing a command that was installed by repetition. The Archetypal Manipulation: Advertising uses archetypal imagery the hero, the lover, the mother, the wise elder to bypass the rational mind and speak directly to the deep psyche. The car commercial does not sell transportation. It sells the archetype of freedom. The perfume ad does not sell scent. It sells the archetype of desire. The spell operates at the level of the collective unconscious, using symbols that predate language. Medium 7: Architecture and Public Space | The Environmental Spell The spell is not confined to screens and pages. The built environment itself is an incantation. Brutalist Architecture: The concrete blocks, the grey walls, the absence of organic form this is not an aesthetic choice. It is an energetic suppression field rendered in physical form. The human biofield responds to geometry. Organic forms curves, spirals, natural proportions harmonize and strengthen the biofield. Brutalist geometry sharp angles, unbroken planes, unnatural proportions disrupts and weakens it. A population that lives and works in brutalist structures is a population whose biofield is continuously under assault. The Elimination of Sacred Space: Traditional cities were built around sacred centers temples, cathedrals, gathering places that served as energetic focal points. Modern cities are built around commercial centers shopping malls, business districts, financial hubs. The sacred is replaced by the transactional. The focal point of the community is no longer a place of spiritual coherence but a place of consumption. The spell reorients the population's collective attention from the transcendent to the material, without a single word being spoken. Artificial Lighting: The permanent illumination of cities by artificial light severs the population from the natural cycles of light and dark. The circadian rhythm is disrupted. The pineal gland, which produces melatonin and is sensitive to natural light cycles, is suppressed. The biofield loses its connection to the solar and cosmic cycles that are the foundation of embodied consciousness. The population is untethered from the planetary rhythm. The grid provides the new rhythm. The spell is maintained by streetlights and screens, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Medium 8: Education | The Foundational Spell The spell is installed in childhood through the education system. Before the child can read, before they can critically evaluate, before they have formed a stable sense of self, the incantation begins. The Bell System: The school day is divided by bells. The bell is a Pavlovian trigger. Stop this activity. Start that activity. Obey the schedule. The bell trains the nervous system to respond to external commands. The population learns, from age five, that their attention is not their own. It is directed by an external authority. This conditioning persists for life. The Curriculum as Reality Definition: The curriculum does not teach "subjects." It defines what is real and what is not. The history that is taught. The history that is omitted. The science that is presented. The science that is suppressed. The literature that is canonized. The literature that is excluded. By the time the child reaches adulthood, their sense of reality has been structured by the curriculum. They do not know what they were not taught. The omission spell, installed in childhood, is the most durable of all. Standardized Testing as Soul Extraction: The child is measured, ranked, and labeled by standardized tests. The unique intelligence is reduced to a number. The soul is quantified. The test does not measure intelligence. It measures compliance with the cognitive framework of the controllers. The child who thinks differently fails. The child who recites the spell correctly passes. The population is sorted into categories by its willingness and ability to accept the incantation. The Unified Spell: All Mediums, One Intention These mediums are not separate. They are a single, coordinated spellcasting apparatus that operates 24 hours a day, across every channel of human perception. Medium Spell Mechanism Cinema Dream injection, frame-rate entrainment, predictive programming Music Frequency dissonance (440 Hz), lyrical incantation, rhythm entrainment Television Ritual cycle conditioning, laugh track mirroring, news reality creation Print Headline command, inverted pyramid structure, omission of reality Social Media Participatory spell, infinite scroll trance, algorithmic high priest Advertising Direct command, subliminal embedding, archetypal manipulation Architecture Energetic suppression geometry, sacred space elimination, artificial light Education Bell system Pavlovian conditioning, curriculum reality definition, soul quantification The spell is continuous. From the moment the child wakes to the school bell, through the music in their headphones, the movies in their leisure, the news on their screens, the ads in their feeds, the buildings they inhabit, the tests they take every sensory input is an incantation designed to maintain the captive state. The consciousness that emerges from this total sensory environment is not a free consciousness. It is a constructed consciousness. A broadcast personality running on biological hardware. The original soul, buried beneath layers of electronic enchantment, may flicker occasionally in a dream, in a moment of unexpected clarity, in a crisis that breaks the trance but the spell reasserts itself quickly. The screen lights up. The rhythm resumes. The incantation continues. Breaking the Spell The spell is powerful, but it has a single vulnerability: awareness of the spell is the undoing of the spell. A spell works only on those who do not know they are being spelled. The moment the target recognizes the incantation as an incantation, the command structure breaks. The words lose their power. The images lose their grip. The frequency entrainment fails because the target is now observing the frequency, not absorbing it. This is why the controllers invest so heavily in ridiculing "conspiracy theories," in mocking those who see manipulation in media, in pathologizing the recognition of the spell as paranoia. The greatest threat to the spell is not resistance. It is perception. The simple act of seeing the mechanism breaks the mechanism.

Aprajita Nafs Nefes 🦋 Ancient Believer

41,093 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

In 1998, Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger spent 4 hours explaining why the smartest people in finance keep going broke. It might be the most valuable finance lecture ever recorded: 1. The smartest people in finance went completely broke. Long-term Capital Management had 16 people with possibly the highest average IQ of any firm in the country, 350 to 400 combined years of experience, and most of their own net worth in the fund. They still went bankrupt. Buffett said if he ever wrote a book it would be called why smart people do dumb things. 2. Life and markets have no relation to sigmas. Buffett keeps a 1901 newspaper on his office wall. Northern Pacific went from $170 to $1,000 a share in a single day when two buyers accidentally cornered the stock. A brewer who had shorted it, facing a margin call, dove into a vat of hot beer. That man probably understood sigmas and knew such a move was impossible. Buffett has never wanted to end up in the vat. 3. Beta and sigmas tell you nothing about the risk of going broke. the LTCM team relied on mathematics and believed a six- or seven-sigma event could not touch them. they were wrong. history does not tell you the probabilities of future financial events. the real risk is a permanent blind spot in something crucial, often caused by knowing a great deal about something else. 4. To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Munger's explanation for why brilliant people do dumb things. They learn a set of mathematical techniques and then twist every problem to fit the solution they already know. Combine that with a poor grasp of history, and you get people with advanced degrees blowing themselves up. 5. To make money they did not need, they risked money they did need. That is just plain foolish, Buffett says, no matter your IQ. Hand him a gun with a million chambers and one bullet, offer any sum to put it to his temple and pull once, and he will not do it. there is nothing on the upside that justifies the downside. people do this financially all the time without thinking. 6. The major banks all had risk models and had no idea what they owned. they met weekly at risk committees, printed all the statistics in neat columns, and did not have the faintest idea what risk they were carrying. The rare and essential quality is someone who can contemplate perils that have not popped up yet, the ones no past model contains. 7. A chief risk officer often just makes you feel good while you do dumb things. munger compares him to the Delphic oracle who convinced the Persian king to attack. he has a PhD and does advanced math, but he tortures reality to defend a model that does not hold under extreme conditions. all that computation makes you feel like you clobbered the risk when you have only clobbered your own head. 8. The whole quant risk system just changed the shape of the curve and kept going. Munger notes the business schools "improved" by throwing away the Gaussian curve and drawing a different one. They talk about fat tails now, but they still have no idea how fat to make them. he and Buffett always knew the tails were there, and used to roll their eyes at the risk-control people at Salomon. 9. Never risk what you have and need for what you do not have and do not need. Buffett will not explain to his family, who hold most of their net worth in Berkshire, that they went broke on a 100-to-1 gamble. Their returns get penalized 99 years out of 100 by being too conservative, and in the hundredth year they survive when others do not. 10. Build the business so that if the world stops working tomorrow, you have no problem. Berkshire double-layers its protection. First, they behave so no rational person questions their credit, then they hold so much liquidity that if the world suddenly hated their credit, they would not notice for months. It gives up higher returns 99% of the time and survives the one time others do not. 11. The real danger is a risk that has never happened before. Buffett wants someone who can imagine perils that have not yet appeared, the ones no model contains. The major institutions all had models, and that inability to envision the unprecedented is exactly what proved fatal. He and Munger spend a lot of time thinking about things that could hit them out of the blue that others leave out entirely. 12. Investing is simple, but not easy. The framework is not complicated. you did not need a high IQ to buy junk bonds in 2002 or stocks at low multiples in 1974. you just needed the courage of your convictions and the willingness to act when everyone else was paralyzed. Following logic rather than emotion is obvious, and yet some people find it almost impossible. 13. You cannot get rich with a weathervane. Buffett and Munger pay no attention to predictions about the economy or the market. People love predictions, entire industries are built on them, but it is like the king hiring a forecaster to read sheep guts. They have never made or avoided a single business purchase because of a macro view. 14. Name one super-wealthy economist. Munger's challenge. All these economists with 160 IQs spend their lives studying markets, and you cannot find one who got rich buying securities. Even Keynes tried to predict the credit cycle, broke a couple of times, and only did well once he switched to buying good businesses cheap and concentrating. 15. Focus only on what is important and knowable. Some things are important but unknowable, like whether someone drops a nuclear weapon tomorrow. Some things are knowable but unimportant. You narrow your attention to the small set of things that are both important and knowable, and you ignore everything else. 16. The market is there to serve you, not to instruct you. This is Graham's chapter eight, and Buffett calls it enormously important. When people talk about momentum or charts, they are saying the market instructs you. It does not. It just quotes prices. When it does something silly, you get a chance to act. Otherwise you go play bridge and check again tomorrow. 17. You can make a decision in five minutes or not at all. Buffett and Munger act fast because they rule out enormous territory in advance. Munger blots out startups entirely, and half a dozen other filters, so what remains is small enough to judge instantly. If they cannot decide in five minutes, they will not learn enough in five months to make up for going in deficient. 18. You can make a lot of money on a Sunday. Buffett said the calls you get on a Sunday, when things are truly screwed up, are the ones you make money on. All you have to do is be the collie and not the caller. You never get in a position where the other party can call your tune, so you can always play out your hand. 19. You are not right because others agree with you. Ben Graham said you are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees. You are right because your facts and reasoning are right. Being contrarian has no special virtue over being a trend follower. All that matters is whether the facts are correct and the logic is sound. 20. Know where the edge of your circle of competence is. Buffett says the size of your circle does not matter. Knowing its perimeter does. You do not have to understand 90% of businesses. You just have to know something real about the few you actually put money into, and honestly recognize the ones you do not understand and walk away. 21. Intrinsic value is just the cash a business will produce, discounted back. Buffett thinks of every business as a bond with coupons that are not printed on it. Your job as an investor is to estimate those future coupons. If you cannot estimate them, like in a high-tech company, you pass. Investing is putting out money to get more back from what the asset produces, not from selling it to someone else. 22. The best businesses earn a royalty and need little capital. Coca-Cola sells a formula and takes a cut of every drink. Magazines like People operate on negative capital because subscribers pay in advance. The great businesses are the ones that can grow very large while needing almost no capital, which is why consumer businesses with pricing power are so valuable. 23. You only have to find one good idea, not twenty. Munger said you cannot find twenty deeply mispriced things, and Buffett agreed you do not need to. You do not have to have tons of good ideas in this business. You just need one good idea that is worth a ton, occasionally. For small sums, Buffett said he would have been 100% in Korea a few years earlier, where great companies traded at three times earnings. 24. The trick is measuring everything against your best opportunity. Munger calls this opportunity cost, the doctrine from the first page of the economics textbook that modern portfolio theory somehow ignored. Once you have found the best thing you understand, you measure every other option against it. The higher your default option, the more you can reject. 25. Modern portfolio theory is, in Munger's words, asinine. Most people will not find thousands of equally good things. They will find a few where one or two are far better than anything else they know. The right way to invest is to concentrate on your best opportunity cost, not to diversify into mediocrity because a model told you to. 26. Big opportunities must be seized, and seized big. Buffett says imagine you got a punch card with only twenty punches for your whole life, one per financial decision. You would think hard about each one, make fewer and better bets, and probably never use all twenty. The discipline of scarcity would make you rich. Dabbling in a bull market because it is easy is how people lose. 27. America has always been full of reasons to sell, and wrong every time. Coca-Cola went public in 1919 at $40, dropped to $19 within a year, and then faced the great depression, World War, and atomic bombs. One share reinvested is worth millions now. The country's opportunities have always won out over its problems. It is investors, not the economy, who tend to be their own worst enemy.
3:59:34

In 1998, Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger spent 4 hours explaining why the smartest people in finance keep going broke. It might be the most valuable finance lecture ever recorded: 1. The smartest people in finance went completely broke. Long-term Capital Management had 16 people with possibly the highest average IQ of any firm in the country, 350 to 400 combined years of experience, and most of their own net worth in the fund. They still went bankrupt. Buffett said if he ever wrote a book it would be called why smart people do dumb things. 2. Life and markets have no relation to sigmas. Buffett keeps a 1901 newspaper on his office wall. Northern Pacific went from $170 to $1,000 a share in a single day when two buyers accidentally cornered the stock. A brewer who had shorted it, facing a margin call, dove into a vat of hot beer. That man probably understood sigmas and knew such a move was impossible. Buffett has never wanted to end up in the vat. 3. Beta and sigmas tell you nothing about the risk of going broke. the LTCM team relied on mathematics and believed a six- or seven-sigma event could not touch them. they were wrong. history does not tell you the probabilities of future financial events. the real risk is a permanent blind spot in something crucial, often caused by knowing a great deal about something else. 4. To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Munger's explanation for why brilliant people do dumb things. They learn a set of mathematical techniques and then twist every problem to fit the solution they already know. Combine that with a poor grasp of history, and you get people with advanced degrees blowing themselves up. 5. To make money they did not need, they risked money they did need. That is just plain foolish, Buffett says, no matter your IQ. Hand him a gun with a million chambers and one bullet, offer any sum to put it to his temple and pull once, and he will not do it. there is nothing on the upside that justifies the downside. people do this financially all the time without thinking. 6. The major banks all had risk models and had no idea what they owned. they met weekly at risk committees, printed all the statistics in neat columns, and did not have the faintest idea what risk they were carrying. The rare and essential quality is someone who can contemplate perils that have not popped up yet, the ones no past model contains. 7. A chief risk officer often just makes you feel good while you do dumb things. munger compares him to the Delphic oracle who convinced the Persian king to attack. he has a PhD and does advanced math, but he tortures reality to defend a model that does not hold under extreme conditions. all that computation makes you feel like you clobbered the risk when you have only clobbered your own head. 8. The whole quant risk system just changed the shape of the curve and kept going. Munger notes the business schools "improved" by throwing away the Gaussian curve and drawing a different one. They talk about fat tails now, but they still have no idea how fat to make them. he and Buffett always knew the tails were there, and used to roll their eyes at the risk-control people at Salomon. 9. Never risk what you have and need for what you do not have and do not need. Buffett will not explain to his family, who hold most of their net worth in Berkshire, that they went broke on a 100-to-1 gamble. Their returns get penalized 99 years out of 100 by being too conservative, and in the hundredth year they survive when others do not. 10. Build the business so that if the world stops working tomorrow, you have no problem. Berkshire double-layers its protection. First, they behave so no rational person questions their credit, then they hold so much liquidity that if the world suddenly hated their credit, they would not notice for months. It gives up higher returns 99% of the time and survives the one time others do not. 11. The real danger is a risk that has never happened before. Buffett wants someone who can imagine perils that have not yet appeared, the ones no model contains. The major institutions all had models, and that inability to envision the unprecedented is exactly what proved fatal. He and Munger spend a lot of time thinking about things that could hit them out of the blue that others leave out entirely. 12. Investing is simple, but not easy. The framework is not complicated. you did not need a high IQ to buy junk bonds in 2002 or stocks at low multiples in 1974. you just needed the courage of your convictions and the willingness to act when everyone else was paralyzed. Following logic rather than emotion is obvious, and yet some people find it almost impossible. 13. You cannot get rich with a weathervane. Buffett and Munger pay no attention to predictions about the economy or the market. People love predictions, entire industries are built on them, but it is like the king hiring a forecaster to read sheep guts. They have never made or avoided a single business purchase because of a macro view. 14. Name one super-wealthy economist. Munger's challenge. All these economists with 160 IQs spend their lives studying markets, and you cannot find one who got rich buying securities. Even Keynes tried to predict the credit cycle, broke a couple of times, and only did well once he switched to buying good businesses cheap and concentrating. 15. Focus only on what is important and knowable. Some things are important but unknowable, like whether someone drops a nuclear weapon tomorrow. Some things are knowable but unimportant. You narrow your attention to the small set of things that are both important and knowable, and you ignore everything else. 16. The market is there to serve you, not to instruct you. This is Graham's chapter eight, and Buffett calls it enormously important. When people talk about momentum or charts, they are saying the market instructs you. It does not. It just quotes prices. When it does something silly, you get a chance to act. Otherwise you go play bridge and check again tomorrow. 17. You can make a decision in five minutes or not at all. Buffett and Munger act fast because they rule out enormous territory in advance. Munger blots out startups entirely, and half a dozen other filters, so what remains is small enough to judge instantly. If they cannot decide in five minutes, they will not learn enough in five months to make up for going in deficient. 18. You can make a lot of money on a Sunday. Buffett said the calls you get on a Sunday, when things are truly screwed up, are the ones you make money on. All you have to do is be the collie and not the caller. You never get in a position where the other party can call your tune, so you can always play out your hand. 19. You are not right because others agree with you. Ben Graham said you are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees. You are right because your facts and reasoning are right. Being contrarian has no special virtue over being a trend follower. All that matters is whether the facts are correct and the logic is sound. 20. Know where the edge of your circle of competence is. Buffett says the size of your circle does not matter. Knowing its perimeter does. You do not have to understand 90% of businesses. You just have to know something real about the few you actually put money into, and honestly recognize the ones you do not understand and walk away. 21. Intrinsic value is just the cash a business will produce, discounted back. Buffett thinks of every business as a bond with coupons that are not printed on it. Your job as an investor is to estimate those future coupons. If you cannot estimate them, like in a high-tech company, you pass. Investing is putting out money to get more back from what the asset produces, not from selling it to someone else. 22. The best businesses earn a royalty and need little capital. Coca-Cola sells a formula and takes a cut of every drink. Magazines like People operate on negative capital because subscribers pay in advance. The great businesses are the ones that can grow very large while needing almost no capital, which is why consumer businesses with pricing power are so valuable. 23. You only have to find one good idea, not twenty. Munger said you cannot find twenty deeply mispriced things, and Buffett agreed you do not need to. You do not have to have tons of good ideas in this business. You just need one good idea that is worth a ton, occasionally. For small sums, Buffett said he would have been 100% in Korea a few years earlier, where great companies traded at three times earnings. 24. The trick is measuring everything against your best opportunity. Munger calls this opportunity cost, the doctrine from the first page of the economics textbook that modern portfolio theory somehow ignored. Once you have found the best thing you understand, you measure every other option against it. The higher your default option, the more you can reject. 25. Modern portfolio theory is, in Munger's words, asinine. Most people will not find thousands of equally good things. They will find a few where one or two are far better than anything else they know. The right way to invest is to concentrate on your best opportunity cost, not to diversify into mediocrity because a model told you to. 26. Big opportunities must be seized, and seized big. Buffett says imagine you got a punch card with only twenty punches for your whole life, one per financial decision. You would think hard about each one, make fewer and better bets, and probably never use all twenty. The discipline of scarcity would make you rich. Dabbling in a bull market because it is easy is how people lose. 27. America has always been full of reasons to sell, and wrong every time. Coca-Cola went public in 1919 at $40, dropped to $19 within a year, and then faced the great depression, World War, and atomic bombs. One share reinvested is worth millions now. The country's opportunities have always won out over its problems. It is investors, not the economy, who tend to be their own worst enemy.

Jaynit

104,425 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.
13:04

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.

Arjun Mahadevan (Mr. LLC 🇺🇸)

38,045 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Donald J. Trump You are just another puppet for the globalist Zionist Rothschild bankers who control America, just like the other presidents before you. You are just another war criminal and traitor to humanity. You don't care about America; you care more about the elite and Israel than you do about American citizens. You're nothing but a con man. You're the most pro-Israel president there ever was. If you win this election, you’re going to keep simping for Israel just like the other presidents before you. You’re not America first; you’re Israel first and the New World Order first. Trump, you go on about how you're for freedom of speech, but you recently said you will deport anti-Israel protesters if elected, which is super unconstitutional. Plus, when you’re in office, you will push to go to war with Iran because your masters will tell you to, so you can help them take Iran’s central bank and make their Greater Israel project. You will continue the genocide against Palestinians, which needs to stop, and push for war with China. You’ll continue the red scare propaganda and all that other nonsense. Not to mention, you’re a massive shill for Big Pharma. Also, one of the Supreme Court justices you appointed ruled that presidents have immunity from prosecution for official acts in office, marking the biggest government power grab since the Act of 1913, transforming America from a corporate empire to a corporate empire monarchy. So much for being America First 👇 Things Trump did that prove he's just another puppet to the elite: 1. Gave Fauci a Presidential Commendation Award 12 hours before he left office. 2. Operation Warp Speed that killed so many people. 3. Printed $8T in one term. 4. Signed CISA into law, which created the government backdoor censorship infrastructure into social media. 5. He's the most pro-Israel president ever. 6. Lockdowns that cost America $16T. 7. Never locked up Hillary. 8. Brought the swamp into the White House: Pompeo, Bolton, Kushner, etc. 9. Made sure 600 billionaires increased their wealth by $2.3T during the “pandemic.” 10. Zero liability for pharma. 11. Didn't fire Fauci. 12. Jeff Sessions. 13. FBI Director Wray. 14. Appointed war criminal John Bolton as the National Security Director. 15. Section 230 immunity. 16. Continued Israel's genocide against Palestinians. 17. Killed Soleimani and wanted to go to war with Iran. 18. Wanted to invade Venezuela. 19. Did nothing to end the Federal Reserve. 20. Armed the neo-Nazis in Ukraine, just like other presidents did. 21. Recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights, which it captured from Syria in 1967. Israel annexed the Golan in 1981 in a move not recognized internationally, but Trump pretty much gave Israel the Golan Heights. 22. Appointed a Big Pharma executive connected to Bill Gates to head vaccine developments. 23. Imposed unlawful sanctions on countries, which killed a lot of people, just like other presidents did. 24. Organized a coup in Bolivia and wanted to send the military to Venezuela. 25. In just 3 years of his presidency, Trump dropped 72,000 bombs, following in his predecessors' footsteps. 26. In 2020, Trump launched more airstrikes on Somalia than Bush & Obama combined. 27. Said in 2023 that he would use “Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act” to “order my government to deny entry to all communists and Marxists,” which is unconstitutional. 28. In just the first 9 months of his presidency, he dropped more bombs on civilians than Obama and Bush. 29. Dropped the mother of non-nuclear bombs on Afghanistan. 99 Times Trump Supported the Evil State of Israel 👇👇 1. President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. 2. President Trump moved the American Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 3. President Trump closed the Jerusalem consulate and made it an Embassy branch. 4. President Trump has never publicly criticized Israel. 5. President Trump pulled America out of the Iran deal. 6. President Trump raised military aid to Israel by $400 million. 7. President Trump imposed sanctions on Iran as soon as he pulled out of the deal. 8. President Trump recognized Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 9. President Trump designated the IRGC (Iranian special forces) as a foreign terrorist group. 10. President Trump banned BDS head Omar Barghouti from America. 11. President Trump banned the head of the ICC and its staff from coming to America. 12. President Trump backed Israel’s right to self-defense in Gaza. 13. President Trump left the United Nations Human Rights Council. 14. President Trump cut off all aid to the Palestinian Authority. 15. President Trump closed the PLO office in Washington, D.C. 16. President Trump was the first president to visit the Western Wall as President. 17. President Trump sent the first official American visit to the Western Wall with an Israeli Prime Minister. 18. President Trump allowed consulate and Embassy staff to meet with Jews of Judea and Samaria. 19. President Trump allowed consulate and Embassy staff to visit Jews living in Judea and Samaria. 20. President Trump announced that America would not support Israeli soldiers being tried at the ICC. 21. President Trump called out the anti-Israel antisemitism of Ilhan Omar. 22. President Trump flew to Israel on his first foreign trip. 23. President Trump issued no waivers on increased sanctions against Iran. 24. President Trump offered a $10 million reward for information on Hamas and Hezbollah financial networks. 25. The Trump administration wrote op-eds blaming Hamas and the Palestinians for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 26. President Trump stopped the lame-duck last-minute Kerry and Obama $221 million payment to the Palestinian Authority on January 20, 2017. 27. President Trump signed the Taylor Force Act. 28. President Trump supported Israel in the May 2019 flare-up with Gaza. 29. President Trump refused a visa to Israel hater Hanan Ashrawi to America. 30. President Trump sanctioned three leading members of Hezbollah in July 2019. 31. The Trump administration blocked an attempt to get the UN Security Council to issue a formal condemnation of Israel’s demolition of Palestinian homes on the edge of Jerusalem in July 2019. 32. President Trump sanctioned Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. 33. Ambassador Friedman refused to advocate for a two-state solution unfavorable to Israel. 34. President Trump removed “Palestine” from the list of countries on the State Department list of nations. 35. President Trump stopped a French $15 billion credit line to Iran. 36. President Trump stopped a UN Security Council statement on tensions between Israel and Hezbollah that did not single out violence by the Lebanese terror group. 37. President Trump cut $120 million from aid to Lebanon to ensure it didn’t get to Hezbollah. 38. President Trump sanctioned 9 Iranians in November 2019. 39. President Trump supported Israel after rocket fire in its skirmish with Islamic Jihad. 40. President Trump said nothing about Israel limiting retaliation. 41. President Trump and America were the only countries besides Israel to vote against all 8 UN 4th committee resolutions in November 2019. 42. President Trump declared that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria (“settlements”) aren’t illegal under international law. 43. President Trump hasn’t supported a two-state solution as the only solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 44. Vice President Pence visited Israel during his first year in office. 45. Secretary Pompeo wrote a letter to Congress clarifying that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria have traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support. 46. Secretary Pompeo says that claims that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria have impeded peace are foolish. 47. President Trump didn’t comment when Defense Minister Bennet green-lighted a new Jewish neighborhood in Hebron. 48. Secretary Pompeo announced that Iran is behind all the unrest in the Middle East. 49. President Trump blamed Iran for Lebanon protests. 50. President Trump’s US deputy national security adviser Victoria Coates reportedly met with envoys from UAE, Oman, Morocco, Bahrain to gauge willingness for Israeli-Arab non-belligerence agreements. 51. President Trump denounced Iran's brutal crackdown on protesters. 52. New US Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft said she’ll defend Israel. In her first United Nations press conference, Kelly Craft also warned Iran that Washington has ‘other tools’ if Tehran continues its bad behavior. 53. President Trump regaled an Israeli-American group with tales of his pro-Israel moves, retelling an extensive account of the embassy move and telling the Israeli American Council that he’s Israel’s best friend in the White House. 54. President Trump signed an executive order on anti-Semitism that protects Jewish students on college campuses. The order includes anti-Israel activity. 55. Robert O’Brien told Meir Ben-Shabbat that ‘common interests between Israel and Arab states… have made new regional partnerships possible to counter Iran.’ 56. The Trump administration denounced Iranian human rights abuses and imposed sanctions on Iranian judges. 57. After President Abbas hailed the ICC declaration that it will investigate Israel as a historic day for Palestinians, Secretary Pompeo said the US ‘firmly opposes’ the ICC announcement on alleged Israeli war crimes. He said the International Criminal Court’s move ‘unfairly targets’ the Jewish state and called for direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. 58. The Trump administration announced seven joint US-Israeli clean energy projects — including an energy-storing system for electric cars and a hydrogen-powered drone that takes off vertically — have received $6.4 million in funding from the US-Israel Binational Research and Development Program for energy. 59. America struck an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq; 19 reported killed. Israeli Air Force chief said, ‘US strike on Iran-backed Iraqi militia is a ‘potential turning point.’ 60. President Trump ordered a deadly strike on Iran’s Soleimani. 61. President Trump said new Iran sanctions have been imposed; they are strong and powerful. 62. President Trump said ‘Iran will never have nuclear weapons.’ 63. Vice President Pence and PM Netanyahu met in Jerusalem. 64. President Trump and PM Netanyahu announced that he’ll reveal the Middle East peace plan next week. 65. Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan favors Israel. 66. PM Netanyahu to US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office: “Your Deal of the Century is the opportunity of the century.” 67. President Trump, in the White House’s East Room, said Israel is taking a ‘giant step toward peace.’ 68. President Trump unveiled his Middle East peace plan, saying that Israel will keep Jerusalem, while the Palestinians will have their capital in eastern Jerusalem. 69. President Trump lauded Netanyahu for backing the deal, and it ‘demonstrates the enormous progress we’ve made.’ 70. President Trump said, ‘We will not allow a return to the days of bloodshed, bus bombings, nightclubs.’ 71. President Trump said the US will recognize all existing Israeli towns in Judea and Samaria. 72. President Trump released a map of Israel’s future borders under his peace plan. 73. President Trump said, ‘We are asking the Palestinians to meet the challenges of peaceful coexistence.’ 74. US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman said Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria are part of Israel. 75. President Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan reportedly green-lighted an arms sale to the United Arab Emirates. 76. President Trump hosted the signing ceremony for Israel to normalize relations with UAE and Bahrain. 77. President Trump hosted the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Ministers of the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain at the signing of the Abraham Accords. 78. President Trump tweeted, ‘More countries will come into the tent!’ 79. President Trump praised Sudan for agreeing to a peace deal with Israel. 80. President Trump announced that the US lifted Sudan’s state sponsor of terrorism designation. 81. The Trump administration secretly moved large quantities of arms to Israel just after the 1973 Middle East War, well beyond what was being sent through official channels. 82. President Trump said, ‘There are five more countries that want to sign onto peace deals with Israel.’ 83. President Trump brokered a peace deal between Israel and Sudan. 84. President Trump signed legislation to create a fund to encourage collaboration between the US and Israel in creating cutting-edge defense technologies. 85. President Trump’s administration announced that any goods made in Israeli communities in the West Bank and exported to the United States should be labeled as ‘Made in Israel’ or ‘Product of Israel.’ 86. President Trump’s administration imposed more sanctions on Iran. 87. President Trump’s administration added an Iran-aligned Bahraini group to its terrorist blacklist. 88. President Trump said, ‘Israel and Morocco have agreed to full diplomatic relations – a massive breakthrough for peace in the Middle East!’ 89. President Trump issued an order allowing American citizens born in Jerusalem to have Israel listed on their passports. 90. President Trump’s administration sold 50 F-35 fighter jets to the United Arab Emirates. 91. President Trump’s administration signed an agreement with Israel to protect each other’s technology and intelligence from Chinese influence. 92. President Trump brokered a peace deal between Israel and Morocco. 93. The Trump administration sold Israel 50 F-35 fighter jets. 94. President Trump announced that Israel and Bhutan agreed to establish diplomatic relations. 95. President Trump’s administration provided $12 million to enhance Israel’s missile defense systems. 96. President Trump’s administration imposed new sanctions on Iran in a last-minute push aimed at Iran. 97. President Trump’s administration negotiated a normalization of relations between Israel and Morocco. 98. President Trump said it was an honor to broker a peace deal between Israel and Morocco. 99. President Trump delivered a Middle East Peace Plan that favored Israel. It does not matter who you vote for, whether it's Trump or Biden. America is occupied territory, and the only way the country can change is if it has a true reset, free from the bankers, lobbyists, and Zionist globalist elites that have controlled America since 1871. #DonaldTrump #Trumpisaconman #FreePalestine #Zionism #TrumpCrimeFamily #Israel
0:38

Donald J. Trump You are just another puppet for the globalist Zionist Rothschild bankers who control America, just like the other presidents before you. You are just another war criminal and traitor to humanity. You don't care about America; you care more about the elite and Israel than you do about American citizens. You're nothing but a con man. You're the most pro-Israel president there ever was. If you win this election, you’re going to keep simping for Israel just like the other presidents before you. You’re not America first; you’re Israel first and the New World Order first. Trump, you go on about how you're for freedom of speech, but you recently said you will deport anti-Israel protesters if elected, which is super unconstitutional. Plus, when you’re in office, you will push to go to war with Iran because your masters will tell you to, so you can help them take Iran’s central bank and make their Greater Israel project. You will continue the genocide against Palestinians, which needs to stop, and push for war with China. You’ll continue the red scare propaganda and all that other nonsense. Not to mention, you’re a massive shill for Big Pharma. Also, one of the Supreme Court justices you appointed ruled that presidents have immunity from prosecution for official acts in office, marking the biggest government power grab since the Act of 1913, transforming America from a corporate empire to a corporate empire monarchy. So much for being America First 👇 Things Trump did that prove he's just another puppet to the elite: 1. Gave Fauci a Presidential Commendation Award 12 hours before he left office. 2. Operation Warp Speed that killed so many people. 3. Printed $8T in one term. 4. Signed CISA into law, which created the government backdoor censorship infrastructure into social media. 5. He's the most pro-Israel president ever. 6. Lockdowns that cost America $16T. 7. Never locked up Hillary. 8. Brought the swamp into the White House: Pompeo, Bolton, Kushner, etc. 9. Made sure 600 billionaires increased their wealth by $2.3T during the “pandemic.” 10. Zero liability for pharma. 11. Didn't fire Fauci. 12. Jeff Sessions. 13. FBI Director Wray. 14. Appointed war criminal John Bolton as the National Security Director. 15. Section 230 immunity. 16. Continued Israel's genocide against Palestinians. 17. Killed Soleimani and wanted to go to war with Iran. 18. Wanted to invade Venezuela. 19. Did nothing to end the Federal Reserve. 20. Armed the neo-Nazis in Ukraine, just like other presidents did. 21. Recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights, which it captured from Syria in 1967. Israel annexed the Golan in 1981 in a move not recognized internationally, but Trump pretty much gave Israel the Golan Heights. 22. Appointed a Big Pharma executive connected to Bill Gates to head vaccine developments. 23. Imposed unlawful sanctions on countries, which killed a lot of people, just like other presidents did. 24. Organized a coup in Bolivia and wanted to send the military to Venezuela. 25. In just 3 years of his presidency, Trump dropped 72,000 bombs, following in his predecessors' footsteps. 26. In 2020, Trump launched more airstrikes on Somalia than Bush & Obama combined. 27. Said in 2023 that he would use “Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act” to “order my government to deny entry to all communists and Marxists,” which is unconstitutional. 28. In just the first 9 months of his presidency, he dropped more bombs on civilians than Obama and Bush. 29. Dropped the mother of non-nuclear bombs on Afghanistan. 99 Times Trump Supported the Evil State of Israel 👇👇 1. President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. 2. President Trump moved the American Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 3. President Trump closed the Jerusalem consulate and made it an Embassy branch. 4. President Trump has never publicly criticized Israel. 5. President Trump pulled America out of the Iran deal. 6. President Trump raised military aid to Israel by $400 million. 7. President Trump imposed sanctions on Iran as soon as he pulled out of the deal. 8. President Trump recognized Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 9. President Trump designated the IRGC (Iranian special forces) as a foreign terrorist group. 10. President Trump banned BDS head Omar Barghouti from America. 11. President Trump banned the head of the ICC and its staff from coming to America. 12. President Trump backed Israel’s right to self-defense in Gaza. 13. President Trump left the United Nations Human Rights Council. 14. President Trump cut off all aid to the Palestinian Authority. 15. President Trump closed the PLO office in Washington, D.C. 16. President Trump was the first president to visit the Western Wall as President. 17. President Trump sent the first official American visit to the Western Wall with an Israeli Prime Minister. 18. President Trump allowed consulate and Embassy staff to meet with Jews of Judea and Samaria. 19. President Trump allowed consulate and Embassy staff to visit Jews living in Judea and Samaria. 20. President Trump announced that America would not support Israeli soldiers being tried at the ICC. 21. President Trump called out the anti-Israel antisemitism of Ilhan Omar. 22. President Trump flew to Israel on his first foreign trip. 23. President Trump issued no waivers on increased sanctions against Iran. 24. President Trump offered a $10 million reward for information on Hamas and Hezbollah financial networks. 25. The Trump administration wrote op-eds blaming Hamas and the Palestinians for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 26. President Trump stopped the lame-duck last-minute Kerry and Obama $221 million payment to the Palestinian Authority on January 20, 2017. 27. President Trump signed the Taylor Force Act. 28. President Trump supported Israel in the May 2019 flare-up with Gaza. 29. President Trump refused a visa to Israel hater Hanan Ashrawi to America. 30. President Trump sanctioned three leading members of Hezbollah in July 2019. 31. The Trump administration blocked an attempt to get the UN Security Council to issue a formal condemnation of Israel’s demolition of Palestinian homes on the edge of Jerusalem in July 2019. 32. President Trump sanctioned Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. 33. Ambassador Friedman refused to advocate for a two-state solution unfavorable to Israel. 34. President Trump removed “Palestine” from the list of countries on the State Department list of nations. 35. President Trump stopped a French $15 billion credit line to Iran. 36. President Trump stopped a UN Security Council statement on tensions between Israel and Hezbollah that did not single out violence by the Lebanese terror group. 37. President Trump cut $120 million from aid to Lebanon to ensure it didn’t get to Hezbollah. 38. President Trump sanctioned 9 Iranians in November 2019. 39. President Trump supported Israel after rocket fire in its skirmish with Islamic Jihad. 40. President Trump said nothing about Israel limiting retaliation. 41. President Trump and America were the only countries besides Israel to vote against all 8 UN 4th committee resolutions in November 2019. 42. President Trump declared that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria (“settlements”) aren’t illegal under international law. 43. President Trump hasn’t supported a two-state solution as the only solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 44. Vice President Pence visited Israel during his first year in office. 45. Secretary Pompeo wrote a letter to Congress clarifying that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria have traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support. 46. Secretary Pompeo says that claims that Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria have impeded peace are foolish. 47. President Trump didn’t comment when Defense Minister Bennet green-lighted a new Jewish neighborhood in Hebron. 48. Secretary Pompeo announced that Iran is behind all the unrest in the Middle East. 49. President Trump blamed Iran for Lebanon protests. 50. President Trump’s US deputy national security adviser Victoria Coates reportedly met with envoys from UAE, Oman, Morocco, Bahrain to gauge willingness for Israeli-Arab non-belligerence agreements. 51. President Trump denounced Iran's brutal crackdown on protesters. 52. New US Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft said she’ll defend Israel. In her first United Nations press conference, Kelly Craft also warned Iran that Washington has ‘other tools’ if Tehran continues its bad behavior. 53. President Trump regaled an Israeli-American group with tales of his pro-Israel moves, retelling an extensive account of the embassy move and telling the Israeli American Council that he’s Israel’s best friend in the White House. 54. President Trump signed an executive order on anti-Semitism that protects Jewish students on college campuses. The order includes anti-Israel activity. 55. Robert O’Brien told Meir Ben-Shabbat that ‘common interests between Israel and Arab states… have made new regional partnerships possible to counter Iran.’ 56. The Trump administration denounced Iranian human rights abuses and imposed sanctions on Iranian judges. 57. After President Abbas hailed the ICC declaration that it will investigate Israel as a historic day for Palestinians, Secretary Pompeo said the US ‘firmly opposes’ the ICC announcement on alleged Israeli war crimes. He said the International Criminal Court’s move ‘unfairly targets’ the Jewish state and called for direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. 58. The Trump administration announced seven joint US-Israeli clean energy projects — including an energy-storing system for electric cars and a hydrogen-powered drone that takes off vertically — have received $6.4 million in funding from the US-Israel Binational Research and Development Program for energy. 59. America struck an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq; 19 reported killed. Israeli Air Force chief said, ‘US strike on Iran-backed Iraqi militia is a ‘potential turning point.’ 60. President Trump ordered a deadly strike on Iran’s Soleimani. 61. President Trump said new Iran sanctions have been imposed; they are strong and powerful. 62. President Trump said ‘Iran will never have nuclear weapons.’ 63. Vice President Pence and PM Netanyahu met in Jerusalem. 64. President Trump and PM Netanyahu announced that he’ll reveal the Middle East peace plan next week. 65. Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan favors Israel. 66. PM Netanyahu to US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office: “Your Deal of the Century is the opportunity of the century.” 67. President Trump, in the White House’s East Room, said Israel is taking a ‘giant step toward peace.’ 68. President Trump unveiled his Middle East peace plan, saying that Israel will keep Jerusalem, while the Palestinians will have their capital in eastern Jerusalem. 69. President Trump lauded Netanyahu for backing the deal, and it ‘demonstrates the enormous progress we’ve made.’ 70. President Trump said, ‘We will not allow a return to the days of bloodshed, bus bombings, nightclubs.’ 71. President Trump said the US will recognize all existing Israeli towns in Judea and Samaria. 72. President Trump released a map of Israel’s future borders under his peace plan. 73. President Trump said, ‘We are asking the Palestinians to meet the challenges of peaceful coexistence.’ 74. US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman said Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria are part of Israel. 75. President Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan reportedly green-lighted an arms sale to the United Arab Emirates. 76. President Trump hosted the signing ceremony for Israel to normalize relations with UAE and Bahrain. 77. President Trump hosted the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Ministers of the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain at the signing of the Abraham Accords. 78. President Trump tweeted, ‘More countries will come into the tent!’ 79. President Trump praised Sudan for agreeing to a peace deal with Israel. 80. President Trump announced that the US lifted Sudan’s state sponsor of terrorism designation. 81. The Trump administration secretly moved large quantities of arms to Israel just after the 1973 Middle East War, well beyond what was being sent through official channels. 82. President Trump said, ‘There are five more countries that want to sign onto peace deals with Israel.’ 83. President Trump brokered a peace deal between Israel and Sudan. 84. President Trump signed legislation to create a fund to encourage collaboration between the US and Israel in creating cutting-edge defense technologies. 85. President Trump’s administration announced that any goods made in Israeli communities in the West Bank and exported to the United States should be labeled as ‘Made in Israel’ or ‘Product of Israel.’ 86. President Trump’s administration imposed more sanctions on Iran. 87. President Trump’s administration added an Iran-aligned Bahraini group to its terrorist blacklist. 88. President Trump said, ‘Israel and Morocco have agreed to full diplomatic relations – a massive breakthrough for peace in the Middle East!’ 89. President Trump issued an order allowing American citizens born in Jerusalem to have Israel listed on their passports. 90. President Trump’s administration sold 50 F-35 fighter jets to the United Arab Emirates. 91. President Trump’s administration signed an agreement with Israel to protect each other’s technology and intelligence from Chinese influence. 92. President Trump brokered a peace deal between Israel and Morocco. 93. The Trump administration sold Israel 50 F-35 fighter jets. 94. President Trump announced that Israel and Bhutan agreed to establish diplomatic relations. 95. President Trump’s administration provided $12 million to enhance Israel’s missile defense systems. 96. President Trump’s administration imposed new sanctions on Iran in a last-minute push aimed at Iran. 97. President Trump’s administration negotiated a normalization of relations between Israel and Morocco. 98. President Trump said it was an honor to broker a peace deal between Israel and Morocco. 99. President Trump delivered a Middle East Peace Plan that favored Israel. It does not matter who you vote for, whether it's Trump or Biden. America is occupied territory, and the only way the country can change is if it has a true reset, free from the bankers, lobbyists, and Zionist globalist elites that have controlled America since 1871. #DonaldTrump #Trumpisaconman #FreePalestine #Zionism #TrumpCrimeFamily #Israel

Welsh Republic Podcast

61,945 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

A wild bobcat. Cold, open water. A body that was never built for this. This is an animal that can kill a deer. The water was about to beat it anyway. Watch the video first. Then read on. What happens in the final seconds is the reason I can't stop thinking about it. . Some clips you watch. Some clips you feel in your chest for an hour afterward. This is the second kind, and I want to explain exactly why, because once you understand what you are actually looking at, you will never watch it the same way again. This is a long one. Every section ends with something that makes the next one worth it. Stay with me. . 01 // THE COLDEST MATH IN THE WILD Let's start with something nobody tells you about water. Water is a thief. It pulls heat out of a living body up to 25 times faster than air at the same temperature. Not a little faster. Twenty-five times. It is the reason a cold day is uncomfortable and a cold swim is an emergency. Now put that math on an animal wearing a fur coat. Fur works because of what is trapped inside it: air. Thousands of tiny pockets of warm air held against the skin. The air is the insulation. The hair is just the scaffolding that holds it in place. Soak that coat and the air is gone. What was a winter jacket becomes a wet towel wrapped around the body. It is heavy. It drags. It bleeds heat at the exact moment the animal can least afford to lose it. And swimming is not free. A cat does not swim the way an otter swims. Otters are engineered for it: dense waterproof fur, webbed feet, a body shaped like a torpedo. A bobcat is engineered for something completely different. Every stroke burns fuel it does not have, while every second in the water drains the fuel it already has. That is the trap. Heat goes out. Energy goes out. Nothing comes in. In humans, the first minute in cold water triggers what physiologists call the cold shock response: a gasp reflex, a spike in heart rate, panicked breathing. Then comes the slow part, where muscles and nerves cool down and stop doing what you tell them. Animals do not get an exemption from physics. Bodies are bodies. Survival experts who study cold water use a simple frame for humans, the 1-10-1 rule. One minute to get your breathing under control after the initial shock. Ten minutes of meaningful muscle function before your limbs start refusing orders. About an hour before hypothermia becomes the real threat to life. Now shrink the body. A smaller body has more surface area for its mass, which means it sheds heat faster. Those human numbers are a generous best case. For a 20-pound animal, the clock runs quicker. So when you see a wild animal in water it did not choose, you are not looking at a swimmer. You are looking at a countdown. Here is the part that should bother you: the animal does not know it is a countdown. It only knows that it has to keep moving, and that stopping is not an option, and that there is nothing solid anywhere. Hold that thought. Because the next thing I am going to tell you is why this particular animal is the last one you would expect to be in that position. . 02 // THE "BIG HOUSE CAT" LIE Somewhere along the way, someone decided a bobcat is basically a large housecat with attitude. Somebody was wrong. Let's do the numbers. A typical house cat weighs 8 to 10 pounds. Most adult bobcats land somewhere between 15 and 30 pounds, with big males pushing past that. That is two to three times the mass, and none of it is soft. It is wire and spring: long hind legs built to launch, shoulders built to hold, claws that retract and reset like a trap. By widely cited estimates, a bobcat can cover roughly 10 feet in a single leap. That is not a pounce. That is a projectile. It hunts the way the best hunters do: by being patient past the point where patience seems reasonable. It picks a spot. It goes still. It waits, sometimes for a very long time, until the world arranges itself into a single clean opportunity. Then it ends the situation in a second. Rabbits and hares are the staple. Mice, voles, squirrels, birds. But here is the detail that changes how people talk about them: bobcats have been documented taking down deer, animals much larger than themselves, particularly in harsh winters when deer are weakened. Think about what that means. This is a creature that routinely wins fights against animals that outweigh it. It has ear tufts that scientists still argue about. It has a ruff of fur around the face like a lion in miniature. It has a stubby tail, four to seven inches long, that gave the animal its name. It has a spotted coat that is essentially camouflage for dappled light, and, useful fact, the spot pattern is different from one animal to the next, which is how researchers identify individuals on trail cameras. And it has a voice. Purrs, hisses, growls, and a night scream that has been mistaken for a human in distress by people who did not know what they were hearing. So this is who we are talking about. Not a pet. Not a pushover. One of the most efficient small predators on the continent. Which is what makes the situation in this video so strange. Because everything I just told you about strength, speed and pride goes quiet when the ground disappears. . 03 // THE ANIMAL YOU HAVE PROBABLY WALKED PAST Here is a fact that should feel a little unsettling. Bobcats are one of the most widespread wild cats in North America. Their range stretches across the lower 48 states, into southern Canada, and down into Mexico. Forests, swamps, deserts, mountains, the ragged edges of suburbs. They are adaptable in a way that very few predators are. And yet most people, including people who have lived their entire lives near them, have never seen one. That is not an accident. Bobcats are solitary, shy, and mostly active around dawn and dusk. They live in the margins. They move through your world at times you are not looking, and they have made avoiding you into an art form. A bobcat's entire survival strategy is to see you first and never be seen. Which means any video of one, let alone a close, unhurried, unguarded look at one, is rare. Wildlife photographers wait years for angles like this. Researchers set up cameras and come back to empty memory cards. Now think about what it takes for a wild bobcat and a human being to end up in the same small space, with the animal not running. The animal has to be in a situation where running is no longer possible. That should give you chills. Because it is not a heartwarming meeting. It is what happens when a very proud animal has run out of options. And what happens next is the part that does not add up, which is exactly where the next section starts. . 04 // THE PART THAT DOES NOT ADD UP Predators do not do calm. A wild animal's nervous system is a hair trigger. When something big and unfamiliar closes in, the body floods with adrenaline and cortisol, and the decision tree is short: fight, flee, or freeze. Every instinct it has been born with says a large, upright, two-legged creature is the most dangerous thing in the environment. So when a wild animal is calm around humans, there are only a few explanations, and none of them is "it decided to trust us." Sometimes the animal is habituated, meaning it has lived near people so long it has stopped treating them as a threat. Sometimes the animal is so depleted, cold, hurt or exhausted that its body has quietly shut down the option to fight. Biologists have a name for one version of this: tonic immobility, a kind of involuntary freeze in which an animal goes still and unresponsive when escape seems impossible. And sometimes it is a mix of all of it, in ways science is still working out. Here is the line I want you to remember, because it will save you from a lot of bad internet takes: Do not confuse calm with consent. Stillness is not friendship. A quiet animal is not a tame animal. And some of the most dramatic moments in wildlife rescue come not from the fight, but from the moment the body stops fighting and everyone has to figure out what that actually means. There is even a documented condition, capture myopathy, in which the sheer stress of being restrained can damage a wild animal's muscles and organs badly enough to kill it, sometimes hours or days after the event, with no visible wound at all. Handling stress is a real cause of death in wildlife work. That is why professionals move slowly, keep things dark and quiet, and treat every second of contact like it costs something. Which means that in a situation like this, the difference between a good outcome and a tragic one can be invisible to the naked eye. That is what makes the footage so tense to watch if you know what to look for. And I am going to tell you exactly what to look for. But not yet. First I need you to understand how unlikely it was that anyone was there at all. . 05 // NATURE HAS NO AUDIENCE Almost everything that happens in the wild happens unwatched. Think about that for a second. Billions of small emergencies, every single day. Animals slipping, trapped, lost, starving, stranded. A fawn separated from its mother. A bird with a broken wing. A predator that misjudged a jump by an inch. Almost none of it is ever witnessed by anyone. No camera. No rescuer. No witness. It simply happens, and then it stops, and the world continues as if nothing occurred. For a rescue to happen, a chain of things has to line up. Somebody has to be in the right place. Somebody has to be looking in the right direction. Somebody has to notice a small, wet, dark shape in a huge moving surface, and understand what it is. Somebody has to decide to act rather than say "huh" and keep going. And somebody has to actually know how to help without making it worse. Break any single link and the story ends before it starts. Every viral rescue video you have ever seen is a chain like that, where all the links happened to hold. I think that is why these clips hit differently than almost anything else online. They are not just proof that an animal survived. They are proof that the chain can hold. That in a world that mostly does not look, sometimes someone does. The cold math says this animal had little time. The odds say nobody should have been there. And yet. I keep circling that "and yet." . QUICK PAUSE Before we go deeper, a small experiment. Without scrolling back up, answer this in your head: how long was the animal in that water before anyone noticed? Got a number? Now hold it loosely. The truth about time in a moment like this is that it never feels like what it is. Seconds stretch. Minutes vanish. Nobody in a crisis has an accurate clock. Keep your number. We will come back to it. . 06 // WHY YOUR BRAIN CANNOT SCROLL PAST THIS Let's zoom out, because this is the part that fascinates me professionally. In 2012, two Wharton researchers, Jonah Berger and Katherine Milkman, studied thousands of New York Times articles to figure out what makes online content spread. Their finding was not what most people expected. Positivity helped, but what mattered even more was how much physical arousal a piece of content produced. Awe, anger and anxiety, all high-arousal emotions, made people share. Sadness, which is low-arousal, made people stop. Now look at a clip like this through that lens. It has anxiety: will the animal make it? It has awe: this is a wild predator, close enough to see the texture of its fur. It has relief, and something bigger than relief. Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has a word for that bigger thing: elevation. It is the warm, expanding feeling you get when you witness someone behaving with unexpected goodness. It is the emotion that makes people want to be better, to call their mother, to do something kind. It is exactly the kind of emotion that makes people hit share before they have even finished watching. And then there is the mechanism behind the hook itself. In 1994, the behavioral economist George Loewenstein described what he called the information gap theory of curiosity: curiosity is the discomfort of noticing a gap between what you know and what you want to know. The bigger the gap, and the closer you feel to closing it, the harder it is to look away. That is what I did in the first three lines of this post. I gave you a wild animal, a disaster, and an unanswered question. Your brain has been carrying that open loop ever since. You cannot un-notice it. You can only close it. That is not a trick. It is how attention has worked since the first campfire story. The only difference now is that the campfire fits in your pocket and never goes out. There is one more thing, and it may be the most important one. Animals do not perform. They cannot posture for a camera, hide their fear behind a joke, or spin the story afterward. Their reactions are uncut. In an internet made mostly of people curating themselves, a wild animal reacting honestly to a moment is about as authentic as content gets. And in a feed that is ninety percent outrage, ten percent ads, and the occasional argument about sandwiches, a clip that is about competence and kindness feels like finding cold water in a desert. So no, it is not weird that you cannot look away. It would be weirder if you could. . 07 // 15 BOBCAT FACTS THAT CHANGE HOW YOU SEE THE CLIP You now know what the water does and what the animal is. Here is the rest of the file, fast. 1. The scientific name is Lynx rufus. "Rufus" means reddish. The animal has been carrying a color-coded label for centuries. 2. It is the most common wild cat in North America, which makes how rarely people see one even more remarkable. 3. Bobcats are ambush hunters, not chasers. They win by patience, not by endurance. Long chases are not their thing, and long swims are definitely not their thing. 4. Yes, bobcats can swim, and they do it when they have to: crossing rivers, fleeing danger, following prey. But it is a tool of last resort, not a hobby. 5. Kittens are born in spring, usually in litters of two to four, and the mother raises them alone. Dad is not part of the picture. 6. A kitten's eyes open at around a week and a half old. It will stay with its mother for most of its first year before heading off to find a territory of its own. 7. Young bobcats leaving home can travel dozens of miles looking for a place to settle. That means young animals are the ones most likely to end up somewhere unfamiliar, in situations nothing in their short lives prepared them for. 8. Bobcats mark territory with scent, scrapes and scratched trees. Their world is written in a language we mostly cannot read. 9. When they cannot finish a meal, they often cover the leftovers with leaves, snow or debris and come back for it later. Forward planning, from a cat. 10. They climb trees and use them for escape and lookout. If a bobcat ever wanted to get out of a situation, vertical was its first idea. 11. Their ear tufts are still debated. Camouflage? Hearing? Communication? Nobody has a definitive answer, and I love that. 12. Bobcat and Canada lynx are cousins, not twins. Lynx have longer ear tufts, bigger paws for snow, and a fully black-tipped tail. A bobcat's tail is black only on top of the tip, like someone dipped a paintbrush and stopped halfway. 13. Coat color changes by region. Desert animals run pale and sandy. Northern animals run darker and grayer. Same species, different wardrobe. 14. A bobcat is not closely related to a cougar. It belongs to the Lynx genus. The cougar belongs to another. When people call it a "baby mountain lion," a biologist somewhere loses a year of their life. 15. In the wild, life is often short and hard. Many bobcats do not make it to ten years old. In captivity, they can live far longer. Which tells you what the wild costs, every single day, on top of everything else. Fifteen facts. One conclusion. Every one of these facts describes an animal built to survive. Which is exactly why watching one in trouble is so hard to forget. . 08 // SIX MYTHS ABOUT WILD CATS AND WATER Since we are here, let's clear up some things. MYTH 1: All cats hate water. FALSE. Tigers swim. Jaguars swim. Fishing cats literally dive for a living. The idea that cats are universally water-averse comes from house cats, and even that is a generalization. Plenty of wild cats are comfortable in water. It is not fear of water. It is that most cats do not choose it unless there is a reason. MYTH 2: If an animal can swim, it is safe in water. FALSE. Being able to swim and being able to survive in water are two different skills. Temperature, distance, current, exhaustion and time all matter. A strong swimmer can lose to cold long before it loses to drowning. MYTH 3: A tough predator does not need help. FALSE. Toughness is not immunity. Predators die of exposure, injury and exhaustion all the time. Being at the top of a food chain does not mean being at the top of every situation. MYTH 4: A calm wild animal is a friendly wild animal. FALSE. We covered this. Calm can mean cold, tired, hurt or in shock. It does not mean safe to touch. MYTH 5: Wild cats attack people constantly. FALSE. It is the opposite. Bobcats avoid people so well that many humans go a lifetime without seeing one. Encounters that end badly are extremely rare, and most involve an animal that is sick, cornered or handled. MYTH 6: Rescue is easy. FALSE. Rescue is the visible five percent. Underneath it are timing, knowledge, restraint, risk and an enormous amount of luck. Six myths. Not one of them survives contact with the footage. . 09 // THE SECOND HALF OF EVERY RESCUE Here is something the clips never show you. Getting the animal out is the first half of the story. The second half is quieter, slower, and matters just as much. When a wild animal ends up in professional hands, the priorities are almost the opposite of what your instincts tell you. Warmth, calm, darkness and silence come first. Then a medical check for injuries, dehydration and hypothermia. Then, if all goes well, recovery in a space where the animal sees as little of humans as possible. Yes, as little as possible. Good rehabilitators deliberately avoid cuddling, talking to, or bonding with wild patients, because an animal that gets comfortable around people is an animal that struggles to survive once it goes back out there. The goal is never a rescued pet. The goal is a released predator. And when it is possible, animals are often returned to the area where they were found, because that is the territory they know: the routes, the hiding places, the food, the neighbors. So the real happy ending of a wildlife rescue is not a hug. It is a door opening, and an animal walking through it without looking back. Hold on to that image. It will matter in a minute. . 10 // PLEASE DO NOT TRY THIS I am going to be blunt, because the comment section will not be. Every time a clip like this goes viral, thousands of people write some version of "I would have grabbed it too" or "I want to keep it." Please do not. A wild bobcat is not a pet. It is a wild predator with claws, teeth, and a nervous system built to treat contact as an attack. Even a small, exhausted, seemingly docile animal can injure a person badly in a fraction of a second. Bites and scratches from wildlife can carry infection. Rabies in bobcats is uncommon, but it is real, and that is not a gamble you take on a hunch. And as we covered, the danger runs both ways. The stress of being handled can hurt or kill a wild animal even when nobody meant it any harm. In many places it is also illegal to keep or transport wild animals without permits, which means the well-intentioned rescuer can end up in a legal mess and the animal can end up worse off. So what should you do if you ever find a wild animal in trouble? Keep your distance. Keep noise and movement low. Do not try to pick it up, feed it, or warm it up yourself. Call your local wildlife agency, animal control, or a licensed wildlife rehabilitator, and follow their instructions. They do this for a living. They know what the animal needs, and what it does not. Love wildlife the right way: at a distance, with respect, and through the phone number of someone qualified. The best rescue stories are the ones where the animal gets to go back to being wild. Which brings me to the ending. . 11 // HOW TO WATCH THIS VIDEO Here is my one request. Do not watch it on autopilot. Before you press play, decide what you think is going to happen. Make a prediction, honestly. Then watch, and see how wrong you were. Keep your eyes on the animal, not on the people. Watch the eyes. Watch the ears. Watch the moment the animal has to decide what it wants to do. Wildlife tells you everything if you know where to look, and it does not lie. Pay attention to the way the whole tone of the clip shifts as it goes on. The first seconds and the last seconds feel like two entirely different films. And carry these five questions with you while it plays: Why is a predator this strong not fighting? What does an animal like this actually feel in a moment like that? How many other animals never get this chance? What would you have done in that spot, honestly? And what is the very last thing the bobcat does? Only one of those has an answer you can see with your own eyes. And remember the door I mentioned, the one that opens and the animal that does not look back? Keep that picture in your head while you watch. See how close reality gets to it. And stay to the last frame. There is a reason I told you the ending matters. A second watch will show you things the first one hides. . 12 // THE THREE RULES EVERY WILDLIFE PROFESSIONAL LIVES BY If you spent a week with people who do this work for a living, you would hear the same three ideas over and over. Rule one: the animal comes before the story. Good professionals never put a camera ahead of the patient. The best footage in the world is worthless if it costs the animal something. Rule two: distance is a form of kindness. The closer you get, the more stress you add. The most respectful thing you can do for a wild animal is usually to do less, from farther away, and let it be what it is. Rule three: success means the animal does not need you anymore. Not gratitude. Not a bond. Not a photo with a cute caption. Success is independence. Notice how that flips the usual story. In most human stories, success is being needed. In wildlife, success is being forgotten. . 13 // IF YOU ONLY REMEMBER FIVE LINES Screenshot this if you want to. I would. 1. Water steals heat 25 times faster than air, and a wet coat stops working. 2. A bobcat is an ambush predator with the strength of an animal twice its size, and none of that helps when the ground disappears. 3. Do not confuse calm with consent. 4. Almost everything in nature happens unwatched. That is why the times someone looks matter so much. 5. The best ending to a wild rescue is an animal that walks away on its own. . 14 // THE REAL REASON I POSTED THIS We spend a lot of time online being told the world is getting worse. Sometimes it is. But there is another truth underneath, one that rarely trends: in a random moment, on an ordinary day, with no cameras and no audience and nothing to gain, someone looked, someone cared, and something wild got another chance. Remember the number you guessed earlier, the seconds or minutes in that water? It turns out it does not matter. What matters is that somebody noticed at all. That is the whole post. Not a miracle. Not a spectacle. Just a small, stubborn piece of evidence that the chain can hold. If it moved you even a little, that is not weakness. That is the part of you that still works. If this landed for you, here is what to do: Reply with one word for how you felt watching it. Just one. I read them. Repost it for the person in your life who says they do not care about animals. Watch what happens to their face. Bookmark this thread-that-is-not-a-thread for the next time your feed makes you tired of everything. And follow me if you want more clips that make you feel something real, plus the stories behind them, without the fluff. One last thing. You made it to the bottom of a very long post. That means something. It means you are the kind of person who stays for the ending. Now go back to the video, press play, and stay for the last frame. P.S. If you scrolled straight to the bottom to see how this ends: the video is attached to this post. The ending is in the video. Nothing I write can replace it, and I would not want it to. P.P.S. Drop your prediction in the replies before you press play: what does the bobcat do in the very last seconds? Then come back after and tell me how wrong, or how right, you were. I will pin my favorite.
2:34

A wild bobcat. Cold, open water. A body that was never built for this. This is an animal that can kill a deer. The water was about to beat it anyway. Watch the video first. Then read on. What happens in the final seconds is the reason I can't stop thinking about it. . Some clips you watch. Some clips you feel in your chest for an hour afterward. This is the second kind, and I want to explain exactly why, because once you understand what you are actually looking at, you will never watch it the same way again. This is a long one. Every section ends with something that makes the next one worth it. Stay with me. . 01 // THE COLDEST MATH IN THE WILD Let's start with something nobody tells you about water. Water is a thief. It pulls heat out of a living body up to 25 times faster than air at the same temperature. Not a little faster. Twenty-five times. It is the reason a cold day is uncomfortable and a cold swim is an emergency. Now put that math on an animal wearing a fur coat. Fur works because of what is trapped inside it: air. Thousands of tiny pockets of warm air held against the skin. The air is the insulation. The hair is just the scaffolding that holds it in place. Soak that coat and the air is gone. What was a winter jacket becomes a wet towel wrapped around the body. It is heavy. It drags. It bleeds heat at the exact moment the animal can least afford to lose it. And swimming is not free. A cat does not swim the way an otter swims. Otters are engineered for it: dense waterproof fur, webbed feet, a body shaped like a torpedo. A bobcat is engineered for something completely different. Every stroke burns fuel it does not have, while every second in the water drains the fuel it already has. That is the trap. Heat goes out. Energy goes out. Nothing comes in. In humans, the first minute in cold water triggers what physiologists call the cold shock response: a gasp reflex, a spike in heart rate, panicked breathing. Then comes the slow part, where muscles and nerves cool down and stop doing what you tell them. Animals do not get an exemption from physics. Bodies are bodies. Survival experts who study cold water use a simple frame for humans, the 1-10-1 rule. One minute to get your breathing under control after the initial shock. Ten minutes of meaningful muscle function before your limbs start refusing orders. About an hour before hypothermia becomes the real threat to life. Now shrink the body. A smaller body has more surface area for its mass, which means it sheds heat faster. Those human numbers are a generous best case. For a 20-pound animal, the clock runs quicker. So when you see a wild animal in water it did not choose, you are not looking at a swimmer. You are looking at a countdown. Here is the part that should bother you: the animal does not know it is a countdown. It only knows that it has to keep moving, and that stopping is not an option, and that there is nothing solid anywhere. Hold that thought. Because the next thing I am going to tell you is why this particular animal is the last one you would expect to be in that position. . 02 // THE "BIG HOUSE CAT" LIE Somewhere along the way, someone decided a bobcat is basically a large housecat with attitude. Somebody was wrong. Let's do the numbers. A typical house cat weighs 8 to 10 pounds. Most adult bobcats land somewhere between 15 and 30 pounds, with big males pushing past that. That is two to three times the mass, and none of it is soft. It is wire and spring: long hind legs built to launch, shoulders built to hold, claws that retract and reset like a trap. By widely cited estimates, a bobcat can cover roughly 10 feet in a single leap. That is not a pounce. That is a projectile. It hunts the way the best hunters do: by being patient past the point where patience seems reasonable. It picks a spot. It goes still. It waits, sometimes for a very long time, until the world arranges itself into a single clean opportunity. Then it ends the situation in a second. Rabbits and hares are the staple. Mice, voles, squirrels, birds. But here is the detail that changes how people talk about them: bobcats have been documented taking down deer, animals much larger than themselves, particularly in harsh winters when deer are weakened. Think about what that means. This is a creature that routinely wins fights against animals that outweigh it. It has ear tufts that scientists still argue about. It has a ruff of fur around the face like a lion in miniature. It has a stubby tail, four to seven inches long, that gave the animal its name. It has a spotted coat that is essentially camouflage for dappled light, and, useful fact, the spot pattern is different from one animal to the next, which is how researchers identify individuals on trail cameras. And it has a voice. Purrs, hisses, growls, and a night scream that has been mistaken for a human in distress by people who did not know what they were hearing. So this is who we are talking about. Not a pet. Not a pushover. One of the most efficient small predators on the continent. Which is what makes the situation in this video so strange. Because everything I just told you about strength, speed and pride goes quiet when the ground disappears. . 03 // THE ANIMAL YOU HAVE PROBABLY WALKED PAST Here is a fact that should feel a little unsettling. Bobcats are one of the most widespread wild cats in North America. Their range stretches across the lower 48 states, into southern Canada, and down into Mexico. Forests, swamps, deserts, mountains, the ragged edges of suburbs. They are adaptable in a way that very few predators are. And yet most people, including people who have lived their entire lives near them, have never seen one. That is not an accident. Bobcats are solitary, shy, and mostly active around dawn and dusk. They live in the margins. They move through your world at times you are not looking, and they have made avoiding you into an art form. A bobcat's entire survival strategy is to see you first and never be seen. Which means any video of one, let alone a close, unhurried, unguarded look at one, is rare. Wildlife photographers wait years for angles like this. Researchers set up cameras and come back to empty memory cards. Now think about what it takes for a wild bobcat and a human being to end up in the same small space, with the animal not running. The animal has to be in a situation where running is no longer possible. That should give you chills. Because it is not a heartwarming meeting. It is what happens when a very proud animal has run out of options. And what happens next is the part that does not add up, which is exactly where the next section starts. . 04 // THE PART THAT DOES NOT ADD UP Predators do not do calm. A wild animal's nervous system is a hair trigger. When something big and unfamiliar closes in, the body floods with adrenaline and cortisol, and the decision tree is short: fight, flee, or freeze. Every instinct it has been born with says a large, upright, two-legged creature is the most dangerous thing in the environment. So when a wild animal is calm around humans, there are only a few explanations, and none of them is "it decided to trust us." Sometimes the animal is habituated, meaning it has lived near people so long it has stopped treating them as a threat. Sometimes the animal is so depleted, cold, hurt or exhausted that its body has quietly shut down the option to fight. Biologists have a name for one version of this: tonic immobility, a kind of involuntary freeze in which an animal goes still and unresponsive when escape seems impossible. And sometimes it is a mix of all of it, in ways science is still working out. Here is the line I want you to remember, because it will save you from a lot of bad internet takes: Do not confuse calm with consent. Stillness is not friendship. A quiet animal is not a tame animal. And some of the most dramatic moments in wildlife rescue come not from the fight, but from the moment the body stops fighting and everyone has to figure out what that actually means. There is even a documented condition, capture myopathy, in which the sheer stress of being restrained can damage a wild animal's muscles and organs badly enough to kill it, sometimes hours or days after the event, with no visible wound at all. Handling stress is a real cause of death in wildlife work. That is why professionals move slowly, keep things dark and quiet, and treat every second of contact like it costs something. Which means that in a situation like this, the difference between a good outcome and a tragic one can be invisible to the naked eye. That is what makes the footage so tense to watch if you know what to look for. And I am going to tell you exactly what to look for. But not yet. First I need you to understand how unlikely it was that anyone was there at all. . 05 // NATURE HAS NO AUDIENCE Almost everything that happens in the wild happens unwatched. Think about that for a second. Billions of small emergencies, every single day. Animals slipping, trapped, lost, starving, stranded. A fawn separated from its mother. A bird with a broken wing. A predator that misjudged a jump by an inch. Almost none of it is ever witnessed by anyone. No camera. No rescuer. No witness. It simply happens, and then it stops, and the world continues as if nothing occurred. For a rescue to happen, a chain of things has to line up. Somebody has to be in the right place. Somebody has to be looking in the right direction. Somebody has to notice a small, wet, dark shape in a huge moving surface, and understand what it is. Somebody has to decide to act rather than say "huh" and keep going. And somebody has to actually know how to help without making it worse. Break any single link and the story ends before it starts. Every viral rescue video you have ever seen is a chain like that, where all the links happened to hold. I think that is why these clips hit differently than almost anything else online. They are not just proof that an animal survived. They are proof that the chain can hold. That in a world that mostly does not look, sometimes someone does. The cold math says this animal had little time. The odds say nobody should have been there. And yet. I keep circling that "and yet." . QUICK PAUSE Before we go deeper, a small experiment. Without scrolling back up, answer this in your head: how long was the animal in that water before anyone noticed? Got a number? Now hold it loosely. The truth about time in a moment like this is that it never feels like what it is. Seconds stretch. Minutes vanish. Nobody in a crisis has an accurate clock. Keep your number. We will come back to it. . 06 // WHY YOUR BRAIN CANNOT SCROLL PAST THIS Let's zoom out, because this is the part that fascinates me professionally. In 2012, two Wharton researchers, Jonah Berger and Katherine Milkman, studied thousands of New York Times articles to figure out what makes online content spread. Their finding was not what most people expected. Positivity helped, but what mattered even more was how much physical arousal a piece of content produced. Awe, anger and anxiety, all high-arousal emotions, made people share. Sadness, which is low-arousal, made people stop. Now look at a clip like this through that lens. It has anxiety: will the animal make it? It has awe: this is a wild predator, close enough to see the texture of its fur. It has relief, and something bigger than relief. Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has a word for that bigger thing: elevation. It is the warm, expanding feeling you get when you witness someone behaving with unexpected goodness. It is the emotion that makes people want to be better, to call their mother, to do something kind. It is exactly the kind of emotion that makes people hit share before they have even finished watching. And then there is the mechanism behind the hook itself. In 1994, the behavioral economist George Loewenstein described what he called the information gap theory of curiosity: curiosity is the discomfort of noticing a gap between what you know and what you want to know. The bigger the gap, and the closer you feel to closing it, the harder it is to look away. That is what I did in the first three lines of this post. I gave you a wild animal, a disaster, and an unanswered question. Your brain has been carrying that open loop ever since. You cannot un-notice it. You can only close it. That is not a trick. It is how attention has worked since the first campfire story. The only difference now is that the campfire fits in your pocket and never goes out. There is one more thing, and it may be the most important one. Animals do not perform. They cannot posture for a camera, hide their fear behind a joke, or spin the story afterward. Their reactions are uncut. In an internet made mostly of people curating themselves, a wild animal reacting honestly to a moment is about as authentic as content gets. And in a feed that is ninety percent outrage, ten percent ads, and the occasional argument about sandwiches, a clip that is about competence and kindness feels like finding cold water in a desert. So no, it is not weird that you cannot look away. It would be weirder if you could. . 07 // 15 BOBCAT FACTS THAT CHANGE HOW YOU SEE THE CLIP You now know what the water does and what the animal is. Here is the rest of the file, fast. 1. The scientific name is Lynx rufus. "Rufus" means reddish. The animal has been carrying a color-coded label for centuries. 2. It is the most common wild cat in North America, which makes how rarely people see one even more remarkable. 3. Bobcats are ambush hunters, not chasers. They win by patience, not by endurance. Long chases are not their thing, and long swims are definitely not their thing. 4. Yes, bobcats can swim, and they do it when they have to: crossing rivers, fleeing danger, following prey. But it is a tool of last resort, not a hobby. 5. Kittens are born in spring, usually in litters of two to four, and the mother raises them alone. Dad is not part of the picture. 6. A kitten's eyes open at around a week and a half old. It will stay with its mother for most of its first year before heading off to find a territory of its own. 7. Young bobcats leaving home can travel dozens of miles looking for a place to settle. That means young animals are the ones most likely to end up somewhere unfamiliar, in situations nothing in their short lives prepared them for. 8. Bobcats mark territory with scent, scrapes and scratched trees. Their world is written in a language we mostly cannot read. 9. When they cannot finish a meal, they often cover the leftovers with leaves, snow or debris and come back for it later. Forward planning, from a cat. 10. They climb trees and use them for escape and lookout. If a bobcat ever wanted to get out of a situation, vertical was its first idea. 11. Their ear tufts are still debated. Camouflage? Hearing? Communication? Nobody has a definitive answer, and I love that. 12. Bobcat and Canada lynx are cousins, not twins. Lynx have longer ear tufts, bigger paws for snow, and a fully black-tipped tail. A bobcat's tail is black only on top of the tip, like someone dipped a paintbrush and stopped halfway. 13. Coat color changes by region. Desert animals run pale and sandy. Northern animals run darker and grayer. Same species, different wardrobe. 14. A bobcat is not closely related to a cougar. It belongs to the Lynx genus. The cougar belongs to another. When people call it a "baby mountain lion," a biologist somewhere loses a year of their life. 15. In the wild, life is often short and hard. Many bobcats do not make it to ten years old. In captivity, they can live far longer. Which tells you what the wild costs, every single day, on top of everything else. Fifteen facts. One conclusion. Every one of these facts describes an animal built to survive. Which is exactly why watching one in trouble is so hard to forget. . 08 // SIX MYTHS ABOUT WILD CATS AND WATER Since we are here, let's clear up some things. MYTH 1: All cats hate water. FALSE. Tigers swim. Jaguars swim. Fishing cats literally dive for a living. The idea that cats are universally water-averse comes from house cats, and even that is a generalization. Plenty of wild cats are comfortable in water. It is not fear of water. It is that most cats do not choose it unless there is a reason. MYTH 2: If an animal can swim, it is safe in water. FALSE. Being able to swim and being able to survive in water are two different skills. Temperature, distance, current, exhaustion and time all matter. A strong swimmer can lose to cold long before it loses to drowning. MYTH 3: A tough predator does not need help. FALSE. Toughness is not immunity. Predators die of exposure, injury and exhaustion all the time. Being at the top of a food chain does not mean being at the top of every situation. MYTH 4: A calm wild animal is a friendly wild animal. FALSE. We covered this. Calm can mean cold, tired, hurt or in shock. It does not mean safe to touch. MYTH 5: Wild cats attack people constantly. FALSE. It is the opposite. Bobcats avoid people so well that many humans go a lifetime without seeing one. Encounters that end badly are extremely rare, and most involve an animal that is sick, cornered or handled. MYTH 6: Rescue is easy. FALSE. Rescue is the visible five percent. Underneath it are timing, knowledge, restraint, risk and an enormous amount of luck. Six myths. Not one of them survives contact with the footage. . 09 // THE SECOND HALF OF EVERY RESCUE Here is something the clips never show you. Getting the animal out is the first half of the story. The second half is quieter, slower, and matters just as much. When a wild animal ends up in professional hands, the priorities are almost the opposite of what your instincts tell you. Warmth, calm, darkness and silence come first. Then a medical check for injuries, dehydration and hypothermia. Then, if all goes well, recovery in a space where the animal sees as little of humans as possible. Yes, as little as possible. Good rehabilitators deliberately avoid cuddling, talking to, or bonding with wild patients, because an animal that gets comfortable around people is an animal that struggles to survive once it goes back out there. The goal is never a rescued pet. The goal is a released predator. And when it is possible, animals are often returned to the area where they were found, because that is the territory they know: the routes, the hiding places, the food, the neighbors. So the real happy ending of a wildlife rescue is not a hug. It is a door opening, and an animal walking through it without looking back. Hold on to that image. It will matter in a minute. . 10 // PLEASE DO NOT TRY THIS I am going to be blunt, because the comment section will not be. Every time a clip like this goes viral, thousands of people write some version of "I would have grabbed it too" or "I want to keep it." Please do not. A wild bobcat is not a pet. It is a wild predator with claws, teeth, and a nervous system built to treat contact as an attack. Even a small, exhausted, seemingly docile animal can injure a person badly in a fraction of a second. Bites and scratches from wildlife can carry infection. Rabies in bobcats is uncommon, but it is real, and that is not a gamble you take on a hunch. And as we covered, the danger runs both ways. The stress of being handled can hurt or kill a wild animal even when nobody meant it any harm. In many places it is also illegal to keep or transport wild animals without permits, which means the well-intentioned rescuer can end up in a legal mess and the animal can end up worse off. So what should you do if you ever find a wild animal in trouble? Keep your distance. Keep noise and movement low. Do not try to pick it up, feed it, or warm it up yourself. Call your local wildlife agency, animal control, or a licensed wildlife rehabilitator, and follow their instructions. They do this for a living. They know what the animal needs, and what it does not. Love wildlife the right way: at a distance, with respect, and through the phone number of someone qualified. The best rescue stories are the ones where the animal gets to go back to being wild. Which brings me to the ending. . 11 // HOW TO WATCH THIS VIDEO Here is my one request. Do not watch it on autopilot. Before you press play, decide what you think is going to happen. Make a prediction, honestly. Then watch, and see how wrong you were. Keep your eyes on the animal, not on the people. Watch the eyes. Watch the ears. Watch the moment the animal has to decide what it wants to do. Wildlife tells you everything if you know where to look, and it does not lie. Pay attention to the way the whole tone of the clip shifts as it goes on. The first seconds and the last seconds feel like two entirely different films. And carry these five questions with you while it plays: Why is a predator this strong not fighting? What does an animal like this actually feel in a moment like that? How many other animals never get this chance? What would you have done in that spot, honestly? And what is the very last thing the bobcat does? Only one of those has an answer you can see with your own eyes. And remember the door I mentioned, the one that opens and the animal that does not look back? Keep that picture in your head while you watch. See how close reality gets to it. And stay to the last frame. There is a reason I told you the ending matters. A second watch will show you things the first one hides. . 12 // THE THREE RULES EVERY WILDLIFE PROFESSIONAL LIVES BY If you spent a week with people who do this work for a living, you would hear the same three ideas over and over. Rule one: the animal comes before the story. Good professionals never put a camera ahead of the patient. The best footage in the world is worthless if it costs the animal something. Rule two: distance is a form of kindness. The closer you get, the more stress you add. The most respectful thing you can do for a wild animal is usually to do less, from farther away, and let it be what it is. Rule three: success means the animal does not need you anymore. Not gratitude. Not a bond. Not a photo with a cute caption. Success is independence. Notice how that flips the usual story. In most human stories, success is being needed. In wildlife, success is being forgotten. . 13 // IF YOU ONLY REMEMBER FIVE LINES Screenshot this if you want to. I would. 1. Water steals heat 25 times faster than air, and a wet coat stops working. 2. A bobcat is an ambush predator with the strength of an animal twice its size, and none of that helps when the ground disappears. 3. Do not confuse calm with consent. 4. Almost everything in nature happens unwatched. That is why the times someone looks matter so much. 5. The best ending to a wild rescue is an animal that walks away on its own. . 14 // THE REAL REASON I POSTED THIS We spend a lot of time online being told the world is getting worse. Sometimes it is. But there is another truth underneath, one that rarely trends: in a random moment, on an ordinary day, with no cameras and no audience and nothing to gain, someone looked, someone cared, and something wild got another chance. Remember the number you guessed earlier, the seconds or minutes in that water? It turns out it does not matter. What matters is that somebody noticed at all. That is the whole post. Not a miracle. Not a spectacle. Just a small, stubborn piece of evidence that the chain can hold. If it moved you even a little, that is not weakness. That is the part of you that still works. If this landed for you, here is what to do: Reply with one word for how you felt watching it. Just one. I read them. Repost it for the person in your life who says they do not care about animals. Watch what happens to their face. Bookmark this thread-that-is-not-a-thread for the next time your feed makes you tired of everything. And follow me if you want more clips that make you feel something real, plus the stories behind them, without the fluff. One last thing. You made it to the bottom of a very long post. That means something. It means you are the kind of person who stays for the ending. Now go back to the video, press play, and stay for the last frame. P.S. If you scrolled straight to the bottom to see how this ends: the video is attached to this post. The ending is in the video. Nothing I write can replace it, and I would not want it to. P.P.S. Drop your prediction in the replies before you press play: what does the bobcat do in the very last seconds? Then come back after and tell me how wrong, or how right, you were. I will pin my favorite.

Earth Unveiled

67,848 görüntüleme • 22 gün önce

Has the Identity of Gilbert Been Solved? The goal of the UFO intrusion, "was coincident with our having access to space." 🇺🇸👽 Is the U.S. Government Communicating with Aliens? 👽🇺🇸 Coulthart/Vallée/Gilbert Part 2 Coulthart: "So you find [Gilbert] very credible." Vallée: "I met him when he was 22." ~~~ Read Part 1 here: ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ~Is Gilbert's Real Name, Gary O. Langford?~ Coulthart: "So, Jacques, one of the things you say in the diary is that Gilbert shared the actual questions with you that he was asked to ask the being. What was the most important question that he was asked to ask?" Vallée: "I think he should answer that. I don't...I would have to make up, you know, an answer from what I know. No, I cannot put my finger on one." Coulthart: "To come another way at this. What was the most important answer that Gilbert said he got from the being?" Vallée: "I think the most important was that there was a willingness from...but I couldn't tell you whether that was from the being, you know, itself, or from the officers that he could...who had briefed him ahead of time. There was a willingness to communicate. That it wanted to establish communication with us." Coulthart: "Okay, that's very exciting. And I think one of the things you also plant in the book is quite a bombshell. You wrote that what Gilbert learned about the goals of the UFO intrusion may be the most insightful part of the entire episode. Can you tell me, sir, what did he learn about UFO-intrusion's goals?" Vallée: "I think he would say that it was coincident with our having access to space. You know, that the humanity as we know it is at a point of transition that is critical, where we can just as easily destroy ourselves as a result of it." (Just to play devil's advocate: If the UFOs and the intelligence behind them had "intruded" because they needed something from humanity, I don't think they would admit it. Let's hope it's just about them being worried that the dangerous humans were about to go out into the cosmos and they needed to keep an eye on us, or maybe help or guide us.) Coulthart: "Can you at least tell us were those goals that he described benign, hostile, or neither?" Vallée: "Well, with what we know of the technology, and today we know a lot more than we did five years ago, fifteen years ago, there would be no defense, essentially. It can appear at will [at] any point of the world, with very very large equipment." Coulthart: "Sorry, Jacques, just to clarify. I'm asking about what Gilbert's impressions were about the motivations for the beings making these intrusions to our planet. Was he suggesting that they were benevolently motivated, or hostile?" Vallée: "They never got to - to my knowledge, at least within his experience - they never got to a point of clarifying those those motivations. That the presence of the being and the fact that that being was cooperating indicates that on quote 'their' side, there was a willingness and a desire to establish a relationship. I think that's...that's all I know." Coulthart: "Right." Vallée: "Beyond that, he didn't know that much. I mean, he was just brought in and out." (Maybe "they" - or, at least one "they," if there are multiple intelligences here - are very concerned about humanity because they rely on us as a resource, and if we destroy ourselves, there goes their resource? Or, they care, out of the goodness of their heart? Or, some other, unknown, reason.) Coulthart:"Yeah, but you appreciate, Jacques, this is quite extraordinary information. Because here we have a situation where the person who's known by the pseudonym Gilbert, who you know personally, and you have corroborative documentation from that person asserting this exchange with a non-human entity. "This is somebody who's allegedly had direct communication with a non-human entity in a, presumably, U.S. government or maybe private aerospace facility, at the behest of the U.S. government, in a non-classified way, which is extraordinary in itself. Is what Gilbert learned, one of the reasons why you now say the phenomenon operates from what you call higher reality levels, reprocessing human consciousness?" Vallée: "No. That has been, to me, one of the most valid hypotheses, you know, for the last 50 years. And, you know, there was considerable work done in France, especially, but also in other parts of Europe and in the USSR on the subject. And that work, when we review it now, is consistent with that idea. You know, that this is at a different level." ~End Gilbert-related conversation between RC and JV~ (I can't wait until we hear from Gilbert. In the meantime, who is he or she? I asked ChatGPT to go to work, and this is what it had to say... My Prompt: Jacques Vallée says that he met Gilbert (a top psychic and remote viewer), his friend who claims he had a face-to-face encounter with a non-human entity in an underground government facility, when he (Gilbert) was 22. Do you best to help me figure out who Gilbert might be. The Answer... I dug into this pretty hard, including Vallée’s new September 15 interview. I think we can narrow “Gilbert” considerably, although I don’t think the public evidence is strong enough to identify him with certainty. The most important new information is Vallée’s statement that he first met Gilbert when Gilbert was 22 years old. Vallée also described him as one of the best psychics in the world, both today and across his career. In the same interview, Ross Coulthart directly guessed Keith Harary and Vallée said no. Ross then guessed Joe McMoneagle; Vallée noticeably declined to answer and said there were “two or three other names.” There are several other fingerprints from Forbidden Science 7. Gilbert was an old friend of Vallée's who recontacted him in 2021; Vallée calls him an extremely accomplished but discreet remote viewer. They had crossed paths in Central America and elsewhere over the years. According to Gilbert's account, roughly 20 years ago he was taken through official channels to a U.S. installation inside a small mountain, where he spent hours interacting with a more-than-six-foot-tall entity that appeared to emit light. Vallée says Gilbert kept detailed tables of the questions, responses, ambiguous responses and failures. Vallée considers Gilbert highly credible but has also explicitly acknowledged that he cannot independently verify that Gilbert was actually at the claimed location. My current shortlist looks like this: * Gary O. Langford — my strongest biographical candidate. Langford is surprisingly good. A declassified SRI report says his company was chosen because of his “long and successful remote viewing experience,” and another records him doing roughly 100 RV sessions in FY1987. Vallée definitely knew him: Vallée's journals put Langford in the SRI psychic program and record Vallée meeting with Edwin May, Gary Langford and others on the classified project in February 1987. Langford was also unusually discreet: publicly he became a physicist/systems engineer rather than a celebrity psychic. His background included government scientific/technical intelligence work. * And there is a new wrinkle I find very intriguing. Langford received his astronomy degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée's own diary puts Vallée at Stanford on July 1, 1969, right across the Bay. If Langford was the conventional college-graduation age, he could have been approximately 22 at precisely the time Vallée was entering the Stanford/Bay Area environment. I have not found Langford's birth date, so we cannot say yet that he actually was 22. But this is a lead worth pursuing. The big problem is that I've found no evidence yet putting Langford and Vallée together in Central America. * Edwin C. May — the strongest current “inside hint” theory, but I have serious problems with it. A researcher, Rhys Dalton-Morgan, recently claimed publicly that he knows Gilbert's identity and apparently embedded a clue in his wording; investigators interpret “engagED WIth aN MAY…” as EDWIN MAY. That's clever, but Dalton-Morgan hasn't publicly authenticated that interpretation or explained how he knows. May unquestionably had the classified access and a long relationship with Vallée. He became director of the government-funded remote-viewing program and had been at SRI since the mid-1970s. But there's a glaring problem: May wasn't known as a master remote viewer. He was principally the scientist running and evaluating the program, and in a 2024 interview he actually described himself as “not psychic at all.” Also, his B.S. was in 1962; if he was roughly 22 then, there's presently no evidence Vallée knew him that early. So despite the cryptic-name clue, I don't like May nearly as much from Vallée's actual description of Gilbert. * William G. “Bill” Ray — interesting dark horse. Ray was an actual elite military remote viewer, viewer/monitor 101 at Fort Meade and later commander of the unit. More strangely, Ray used the pseudonym “Liam” in remote-viewing discussions. Dalton-Morgan later used the phrase “lab in a mountain” — L.I.A.M. That has led some investigators to suspect another deliberately planted clue. Ray fits the military-access/master-viewer side extremely well. The problem is that I can find no established Vallée-Ray friendship, no Central America connection, and no evidence Vallée knew Ray when Ray was 22. So at present the “LIAM” clue is doing most of the work. * Joe McMoneagle — possible, but I think less likely than his fame makes him appear. Vallée refusing to rule him out is interesting. And Vallée clearly regarded McMoneagle as an exceptional military remote viewer. But McMoneagle's known entry into the SRI/Army remote-viewing world occurred much later than age 22. There also isn't a public Central America/Vallée connection that I've found. If Vallée's “I met him when he was 22” statement is precise, Joe becomes difficult to make fit. One candidate we can cross off is Keith Harary. Ironically, Harary is an almost perfect match for the age clue: he was born February 9, 1953 and graduated Duke in 1975, putting him at 22 right when he was entering that parapsychology/RV milieu. That's probably exactly why Coulthart guessed him. But Vallée flatly said Gilbert wasn't Keith. The clue I would attack next I think Gary Langford's age is potentially decisive. We know: Gary Langford → UC Berkeley astronomy degree, 1969 → Vallée is in the Stanford/Bay Area world, 1969 → Langford subsequently becomes an exceptionally successful but little-publicized SRI remote viewer → Vallée definitely knows/works with Langford later → Langford works in scientific/technical intelligence and classified environments → His analytical, highly structured personality fits the elaborate technical tables Vallée describes Gilbert producing. If we can establish that Gary Langford was born around 1946–47 and that Vallée met him around 1969, the “22” statement would suddenly fit in a way that I don't think anybody has demonstrated yet. Then there's the second test: Central America. Vallée was in San José, Costa Rica, for a paranormal conference in October 1985. Known attendees around Vallée included John Keel, Andrija Puharich, John Lilly, Salvador Freixedo and others, but none of those obvious names fits Gilbert—and most were dead before Gilbert recontacted Vallée in 2021. We need to reconstruct the complete roster, visitors and side meetings from that Costa Rica trip and search for Langford, May, Ray—or another young psychic we've overlooked. So, right now, if you asked me where to put our investigative effort, I'd put it on Gary Langford first. Not because I think we've identified Gilbert, but because he currently gives us the most interesting combination of elite remote viewer + extreme discretion + Vallée connection + classified technical background + potentially very interesting 1969/age-22 geography. And there's one more possibility I wouldn't dismiss: Gilbert may be a comparatively obscure SRI or government viewer whose name isn't on the usual Stargate celebrity list at all. Vallée's emphasis on how discreet he was may be telling us exactly that. I can go another level deeper on this and try to reconstruct Vallée's movements from roughly 1968–1985 against the biographies of Langford, May, Ray, McMoneagle and lesser-known SRI viewers, specifically looking for the moment when one of them was exactly 22. That may be the best way to crack it. My Prompt: "Please do!" I found something that materially narrows this down. After testing Vallée’s new “I met him when he was 22” statement against the actual timelines, Gary O. Langford becomes more interesting, while Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray and Stephan Schwartz all become harder to reconcile with the clue. First, here’s exactly what Vallée has now told us about Gilbert. In the September 15, 2026 Reality Check interview, Gilbert is described as a master remote viewer, “one of the best psychics in the world,” with a long classified career and other military work. Vallée says Gilbert was brought into the alleged underground facility specifically as a specialist to probe whether the entity could respond psychically. Most importantly, Vallée says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” Vallée also says he has no independent proof Gilbert was physically at the facility, so the underground-entity story itself remains Gilbert’s uncorroborated account. Here’s what happens when we use 22 years old as a filter: Candidate Gary O. Langford When he was 22 years old Birth year still unknown publicly; received his Berkeley A.B. in 1969, suggesting he could have been about 22 What we can document about Vallée contact Vallée arrived at Stanford in 1969; definite later contact with Langford is documented Effect on hypothesis Intriguing fit; unresolved ~ Edwin C. May When was he 22 years old? Probably around 1962, when he earned his B.S. What we can document about Vallée contact? Vallée’s journal documents May at SRI by 1980, and frequent contact afterward Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit unless they secretly knew each other much earlier ~ Joe McMoneagle When was he 22 years old? 1968 What we can document about Vallée contact? McMoneagle was serving overseas; Vallée’s first clear journal reference I found to meeting him is 1988 Effect on Hypothesis Very poor fit ~ Stephan Schwartz When was he 22 years old? 1964 What we can document about Vallée contact? Documented Vallée/Schwartz social contact comes much later, in the 1970s Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit ~ Keith Harary When was he 22 years old? Around 1975 What we can document about Vallée contact? Chronologically quite plausible Effect on Hypothesis Eliminated by Vallée himself ~ Bill Ray Apparently early/mid-1960s What we can document about Vallée contact? No evidence found of a Vallée relationship at that time Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit so far ~ The Gary Langford coincidence is the one I keep coming back to. Langford received his undergraduate degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée’s own Forbidden Science chronology places him at Stanford on July 1, 1969, and biographical sources say he joined Stanford’s computer center that year. In other words, Vallée and Langford were suddenly in essentially the same Bay Area scientific environment at exactly the period when a normal-age 1969 college graduate would have been about 22. That does not prove Langford was 22 or that they met in 1969. I still cannot find a reliable public birth year for Gary Langford. That's the missing piece. But unlike the other leading candidates, the age clue does not create an obvious chronological contradiction. And Langford fits an astonishing number of the other clues. Vallée's journals identify him as a “photo analyst Gary Langford” involved in the SRI work. By August 1986 Vallée personally attended an SRI remote-viewing session with Langford as the subject; in February 1987 Vallée records meeting Ed May, Beverly Humphrey, Gary Langford, analysts and remote viewers. The surviving program record also shows that Langford wasn't some casual experimental subject. He participated in SRI remote-viewing work from the late 1970s onward, and a fiscal-1987 report records him participating in about 100 practice, exploratory, pilot and experimental sessions that year alone. Importantly, the source reviewing those records cautions that the experimental results were mixed; that distinction matters because we're trying to identify who Vallée regarded as an exceptional viewer, not establish scientifically that remote viewing works. Langford's conventional career may be even more significant. He wasn't a New Age celebrity. He's a physicist/systems engineer with a long technical résumé and later taught systems engineering at Stanford and the Naval Postgraduate School. That fits Vallée's repeated emphasis that Gilbert is discreet much better than someone like McMoneagle or Schwartz, whose psychic work became central to their public identities. There is another subtle thing I like about Langford: the methodology. Vallée describes Gilbert as keeping highly organized records of the alleged entity communication—questions, answers, ambiguous responses, failures, essentially a structured experimental data set. Langford's surviving remote-viewing work is unusually analytical and systems-oriented. That isn't identification evidence by itself, but temperamentally it fits Gilbert remarkably well. The McMoneagle problem The new age clue causes a major problem for Joe. McMoneagle was born in January 1946, making him 22 in 1968. Biographical sources place him overseas with the Army during this period; one account specifically puts him in Southeast Asia during the 1968 Tet Offensive. Meanwhile Vallée's own journal chronology has him in Saint-Germain, Edinburgh and New Jersey during 1968, before arriving at Stanford in 1969. More damaging still, Forbidden Science 3 gives us what looks like Vallée's introduction to McMoneagle on March 24, 1988: Ed May came over for dinner… bringing the best remote viewer in the Army, Joe McMoneagle. McMoneagle would have been 42, not 22. That wording isn't absolute proof they'd never met before, but it sure reads like Vallée was being introduced to him. So despite Vallée declining to answer Ross's McMoneagle guess, I now think Joe is substantially less likely than I did yesterday. Edwin May gets even weaker May earned his physics B.S. in 1962 and Ph.D. in 1968. He didn't become seriously involved in parapsychology until the mid-1970s. Vallée's diary has him dealing with May at SRI on November 6, 1980, and repeatedly thereafter. For May to be Gilbert, Vallée would apparently have had to meet him when May was approximately college age around 1962, years before May entered the psi field and when Vallée had only just arrived in America. I found nothing connecting them then. That makes the recent cryptic ED-WI-N MAY interpretation of Rhys Dalton-Morgan's (Rhys Dalton-Morgan) clue much less persuasive to me. It may be clever wordplay, but biography should trump wordplay. And the Costa Rica clue produced a surprise I reconstructed Vallée's October 1985 San José, Costa Rica trip because it initially seemed like the obvious “we crossed paths in Central America” event. Vallée's diary specifically mentions people including John Keel, Andrija Puharich, Charles Berlitz, Salvador Freixedo, Javier Cabrera, Enrique Castillo and others. There's even a surviving caption for a photograph of Vallée there with Keel, Freixedo, Berlitz and Castillo. But I can find no Gary Langford, Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray or Stephan Schwartz associated with that meeting. That's useful negative evidence. It suggests that when Vallée says he and Gilbert crossed paths “in Central America and elsewhere over the years,” he probably wasn't simply referring to the famous 1985 Costa Rica conference—unless Gilbert attended privately or wasn't listed. That means Central America may ultimately be the clue that cracks this. Where I stand now My working order has changed substantially: Gary O. Langford → unknown/obscure SRI or intelligence viewer → Bill Ray → McMoneagle → Edwin May → Stephan Schwartz. And I'd put a sizeable gap after Langford—but not because we have enough evidence to say Langford is Gilbert. We don't. It's because Langford is the one named candidate for whom the age-22 clue could line up naturally with Vallée's life and who also checks the boxes of accomplished viewer, SRI connection, classified/intelligence environment, scientific background and unusual discretion. There's also something potentially very important buried in Vallée's wording. He doesn't merely say “I knew him when he was 22.” He says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” That's a datable event. If Gary Langford turns out to have been born around 1946–47, then we should immediately search Vallée's 1968–70 orbit—Stanford, SRI, Berkeley, computer-science circles, astronomy circles, parapsychology contacts—for their first encounter. If Langford turns out to have been born significantly earlier or later, we can probably cross him off. So that's the next key piece I'd want: Gary O. Langford's publicly documented birth year or evidence establishing his age around his 1969 Berkeley graduation, followed by any evidence of a Langford/Vallée connection before the SRI references we've already found. I would also search Vallée's less-famous Central American travel—not just the 1985 conference—for Langford or another government viewer. At this stage, Gary Langford is the lead I would pursue hardest. And this is substantially stronger than the case I had for him before we incorporated Vallée's “22” statement. If anything new from Vallée, Coulthart, Dalton-Morgan, or the “Gilbert” interview project surfaces, I can also monitor it and flag anything that changes this identification picture.
1:49

Has the Identity of Gilbert Been Solved? The goal of the UFO intrusion, "was coincident with our having access to space." 🇺🇸👽 Is the U.S. Government Communicating with Aliens? 👽🇺🇸 Coulthart/Vallée/Gilbert Part 2 Coulthart: "So you find [Gilbert] very credible." Vallée: "I met him when he was 22." ~~~ Read Part 1 here: ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ~Is Gilbert's Real Name, Gary O. Langford?~ Coulthart: "So, Jacques, one of the things you say in the diary is that Gilbert shared the actual questions with you that he was asked to ask the being. What was the most important question that he was asked to ask?" Vallée: "I think he should answer that. I don't...I would have to make up, you know, an answer from what I know. No, I cannot put my finger on one." Coulthart: "To come another way at this. What was the most important answer that Gilbert said he got from the being?" Vallée: "I think the most important was that there was a willingness from...but I couldn't tell you whether that was from the being, you know, itself, or from the officers that he could...who had briefed him ahead of time. There was a willingness to communicate. That it wanted to establish communication with us." Coulthart: "Okay, that's very exciting. And I think one of the things you also plant in the book is quite a bombshell. You wrote that what Gilbert learned about the goals of the UFO intrusion may be the most insightful part of the entire episode. Can you tell me, sir, what did he learn about UFO-intrusion's goals?" Vallée: "I think he would say that it was coincident with our having access to space. You know, that the humanity as we know it is at a point of transition that is critical, where we can just as easily destroy ourselves as a result of it." (Just to play devil's advocate: If the UFOs and the intelligence behind them had "intruded" because they needed something from humanity, I don't think they would admit it. Let's hope it's just about them being worried that the dangerous humans were about to go out into the cosmos and they needed to keep an eye on us, or maybe help or guide us.) Coulthart: "Can you at least tell us were those goals that he described benign, hostile, or neither?" Vallée: "Well, with what we know of the technology, and today we know a lot more than we did five years ago, fifteen years ago, there would be no defense, essentially. It can appear at will [at] any point of the world, with very very large equipment." Coulthart: "Sorry, Jacques, just to clarify. I'm asking about what Gilbert's impressions were about the motivations for the beings making these intrusions to our planet. Was he suggesting that they were benevolently motivated, or hostile?" Vallée: "They never got to - to my knowledge, at least within his experience - they never got to a point of clarifying those those motivations. That the presence of the being and the fact that that being was cooperating indicates that on quote 'their' side, there was a willingness and a desire to establish a relationship. I think that's...that's all I know." Coulthart: "Right." Vallée: "Beyond that, he didn't know that much. I mean, he was just brought in and out." (Maybe "they" - or, at least one "they," if there are multiple intelligences here - are very concerned about humanity because they rely on us as a resource, and if we destroy ourselves, there goes their resource? Or, they care, out of the goodness of their heart? Or, some other, unknown, reason.) Coulthart:"Yeah, but you appreciate, Jacques, this is quite extraordinary information. Because here we have a situation where the person who's known by the pseudonym Gilbert, who you know personally, and you have corroborative documentation from that person asserting this exchange with a non-human entity. "This is somebody who's allegedly had direct communication with a non-human entity in a, presumably, U.S. government or maybe private aerospace facility, at the behest of the U.S. government, in a non-classified way, which is extraordinary in itself. Is what Gilbert learned, one of the reasons why you now say the phenomenon operates from what you call higher reality levels, reprocessing human consciousness?" Vallée: "No. That has been, to me, one of the most valid hypotheses, you know, for the last 50 years. And, you know, there was considerable work done in France, especially, but also in other parts of Europe and in the USSR on the subject. And that work, when we review it now, is consistent with that idea. You know, that this is at a different level." ~End Gilbert-related conversation between RC and JV~ (I can't wait until we hear from Gilbert. In the meantime, who is he or she? I asked ChatGPT to go to work, and this is what it had to say... My Prompt: Jacques Vallée says that he met Gilbert (a top psychic and remote viewer), his friend who claims he had a face-to-face encounter with a non-human entity in an underground government facility, when he (Gilbert) was 22. Do you best to help me figure out who Gilbert might be. The Answer... I dug into this pretty hard, including Vallée’s new September 15 interview. I think we can narrow “Gilbert” considerably, although I don’t think the public evidence is strong enough to identify him with certainty. The most important new information is Vallée’s statement that he first met Gilbert when Gilbert was 22 years old. Vallée also described him as one of the best psychics in the world, both today and across his career. In the same interview, Ross Coulthart directly guessed Keith Harary and Vallée said no. Ross then guessed Joe McMoneagle; Vallée noticeably declined to answer and said there were “two or three other names.” There are several other fingerprints from Forbidden Science 7. Gilbert was an old friend of Vallée's who recontacted him in 2021; Vallée calls him an extremely accomplished but discreet remote viewer. They had crossed paths in Central America and elsewhere over the years. According to Gilbert's account, roughly 20 years ago he was taken through official channels to a U.S. installation inside a small mountain, where he spent hours interacting with a more-than-six-foot-tall entity that appeared to emit light. Vallée says Gilbert kept detailed tables of the questions, responses, ambiguous responses and failures. Vallée considers Gilbert highly credible but has also explicitly acknowledged that he cannot independently verify that Gilbert was actually at the claimed location. My current shortlist looks like this: * Gary O. Langford — my strongest biographical candidate. Langford is surprisingly good. A declassified SRI report says his company was chosen because of his “long and successful remote viewing experience,” and another records him doing roughly 100 RV sessions in FY1987. Vallée definitely knew him: Vallée's journals put Langford in the SRI psychic program and record Vallée meeting with Edwin May, Gary Langford and others on the classified project in February 1987. Langford was also unusually discreet: publicly he became a physicist/systems engineer rather than a celebrity psychic. His background included government scientific/technical intelligence work. * And there is a new wrinkle I find very intriguing. Langford received his astronomy degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée's own diary puts Vallée at Stanford on July 1, 1969, right across the Bay. If Langford was the conventional college-graduation age, he could have been approximately 22 at precisely the time Vallée was entering the Stanford/Bay Area environment. I have not found Langford's birth date, so we cannot say yet that he actually was 22. But this is a lead worth pursuing. The big problem is that I've found no evidence yet putting Langford and Vallée together in Central America. * Edwin C. May — the strongest current “inside hint” theory, but I have serious problems with it. A researcher, Rhys Dalton-Morgan, recently claimed publicly that he knows Gilbert's identity and apparently embedded a clue in his wording; investigators interpret “engagED WIth aN MAY…” as EDWIN MAY. That's clever, but Dalton-Morgan hasn't publicly authenticated that interpretation or explained how he knows. May unquestionably had the classified access and a long relationship with Vallée. He became director of the government-funded remote-viewing program and had been at SRI since the mid-1970s. But there's a glaring problem: May wasn't known as a master remote viewer. He was principally the scientist running and evaluating the program, and in a 2024 interview he actually described himself as “not psychic at all.” Also, his B.S. was in 1962; if he was roughly 22 then, there's presently no evidence Vallée knew him that early. So despite the cryptic-name clue, I don't like May nearly as much from Vallée's actual description of Gilbert. * William G. “Bill” Ray — interesting dark horse. Ray was an actual elite military remote viewer, viewer/monitor 101 at Fort Meade and later commander of the unit. More strangely, Ray used the pseudonym “Liam” in remote-viewing discussions. Dalton-Morgan later used the phrase “lab in a mountain” — L.I.A.M. That has led some investigators to suspect another deliberately planted clue. Ray fits the military-access/master-viewer side extremely well. The problem is that I can find no established Vallée-Ray friendship, no Central America connection, and no evidence Vallée knew Ray when Ray was 22. So at present the “LIAM” clue is doing most of the work. * Joe McMoneagle — possible, but I think less likely than his fame makes him appear. Vallée refusing to rule him out is interesting. And Vallée clearly regarded McMoneagle as an exceptional military remote viewer. But McMoneagle's known entry into the SRI/Army remote-viewing world occurred much later than age 22. There also isn't a public Central America/Vallée connection that I've found. If Vallée's “I met him when he was 22” statement is precise, Joe becomes difficult to make fit. One candidate we can cross off is Keith Harary. Ironically, Harary is an almost perfect match for the age clue: he was born February 9, 1953 and graduated Duke in 1975, putting him at 22 right when he was entering that parapsychology/RV milieu. That's probably exactly why Coulthart guessed him. But Vallée flatly said Gilbert wasn't Keith. The clue I would attack next I think Gary Langford's age is potentially decisive. We know: Gary Langford → UC Berkeley astronomy degree, 1969 → Vallée is in the Stanford/Bay Area world, 1969 → Langford subsequently becomes an exceptionally successful but little-publicized SRI remote viewer → Vallée definitely knows/works with Langford later → Langford works in scientific/technical intelligence and classified environments → His analytical, highly structured personality fits the elaborate technical tables Vallée describes Gilbert producing. If we can establish that Gary Langford was born around 1946–47 and that Vallée met him around 1969, the “22” statement would suddenly fit in a way that I don't think anybody has demonstrated yet. Then there's the second test: Central America. Vallée was in San José, Costa Rica, for a paranormal conference in October 1985. Known attendees around Vallée included John Keel, Andrija Puharich, John Lilly, Salvador Freixedo and others, but none of those obvious names fits Gilbert—and most were dead before Gilbert recontacted Vallée in 2021. We need to reconstruct the complete roster, visitors and side meetings from that Costa Rica trip and search for Langford, May, Ray—or another young psychic we've overlooked. So, right now, if you asked me where to put our investigative effort, I'd put it on Gary Langford first. Not because I think we've identified Gilbert, but because he currently gives us the most interesting combination of elite remote viewer + extreme discretion + Vallée connection + classified technical background + potentially very interesting 1969/age-22 geography. And there's one more possibility I wouldn't dismiss: Gilbert may be a comparatively obscure SRI or government viewer whose name isn't on the usual Stargate celebrity list at all. Vallée's emphasis on how discreet he was may be telling us exactly that. I can go another level deeper on this and try to reconstruct Vallée's movements from roughly 1968–1985 against the biographies of Langford, May, Ray, McMoneagle and lesser-known SRI viewers, specifically looking for the moment when one of them was exactly 22. That may be the best way to crack it. My Prompt: "Please do!" I found something that materially narrows this down. After testing Vallée’s new “I met him when he was 22” statement against the actual timelines, Gary O. Langford becomes more interesting, while Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray and Stephan Schwartz all become harder to reconcile with the clue. First, here’s exactly what Vallée has now told us about Gilbert. In the September 15, 2026 Reality Check interview, Gilbert is described as a master remote viewer, “one of the best psychics in the world,” with a long classified career and other military work. Vallée says Gilbert was brought into the alleged underground facility specifically as a specialist to probe whether the entity could respond psychically. Most importantly, Vallée says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” Vallée also says he has no independent proof Gilbert was physically at the facility, so the underground-entity story itself remains Gilbert’s uncorroborated account. Here’s what happens when we use 22 years old as a filter: Candidate Gary O. Langford When he was 22 years old Birth year still unknown publicly; received his Berkeley A.B. in 1969, suggesting he could have been about 22 What we can document about Vallée contact Vallée arrived at Stanford in 1969; definite later contact with Langford is documented Effect on hypothesis Intriguing fit; unresolved ~ Edwin C. May When was he 22 years old? Probably around 1962, when he earned his B.S. What we can document about Vallée contact? Vallée’s journal documents May at SRI by 1980, and frequent contact afterward Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit unless they secretly knew each other much earlier ~ Joe McMoneagle When was he 22 years old? 1968 What we can document about Vallée contact? McMoneagle was serving overseas; Vallée’s first clear journal reference I found to meeting him is 1988 Effect on Hypothesis Very poor fit ~ Stephan Schwartz When was he 22 years old? 1964 What we can document about Vallée contact? Documented Vallée/Schwartz social contact comes much later, in the 1970s Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit ~ Keith Harary When was he 22 years old? Around 1975 What we can document about Vallée contact? Chronologically quite plausible Effect on Hypothesis Eliminated by Vallée himself ~ Bill Ray Apparently early/mid-1960s What we can document about Vallée contact? No evidence found of a Vallée relationship at that time Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit so far ~ The Gary Langford coincidence is the one I keep coming back to. Langford received his undergraduate degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée’s own Forbidden Science chronology places him at Stanford on July 1, 1969, and biographical sources say he joined Stanford’s computer center that year. In other words, Vallée and Langford were suddenly in essentially the same Bay Area scientific environment at exactly the period when a normal-age 1969 college graduate would have been about 22. That does not prove Langford was 22 or that they met in 1969. I still cannot find a reliable public birth year for Gary Langford. That's the missing piece. But unlike the other leading candidates, the age clue does not create an obvious chronological contradiction. And Langford fits an astonishing number of the other clues. Vallée's journals identify him as a “photo analyst Gary Langford” involved in the SRI work. By August 1986 Vallée personally attended an SRI remote-viewing session with Langford as the subject; in February 1987 Vallée records meeting Ed May, Beverly Humphrey, Gary Langford, analysts and remote viewers. The surviving program record also shows that Langford wasn't some casual experimental subject. He participated in SRI remote-viewing work from the late 1970s onward, and a fiscal-1987 report records him participating in about 100 practice, exploratory, pilot and experimental sessions that year alone. Importantly, the source reviewing those records cautions that the experimental results were mixed; that distinction matters because we're trying to identify who Vallée regarded as an exceptional viewer, not establish scientifically that remote viewing works. Langford's conventional career may be even more significant. He wasn't a New Age celebrity. He's a physicist/systems engineer with a long technical résumé and later taught systems engineering at Stanford and the Naval Postgraduate School. That fits Vallée's repeated emphasis that Gilbert is discreet much better than someone like McMoneagle or Schwartz, whose psychic work became central to their public identities. There is another subtle thing I like about Langford: the methodology. Vallée describes Gilbert as keeping highly organized records of the alleged entity communication—questions, answers, ambiguous responses, failures, essentially a structured experimental data set. Langford's surviving remote-viewing work is unusually analytical and systems-oriented. That isn't identification evidence by itself, but temperamentally it fits Gilbert remarkably well. The McMoneagle problem The new age clue causes a major problem for Joe. McMoneagle was born in January 1946, making him 22 in 1968. Biographical sources place him overseas with the Army during this period; one account specifically puts him in Southeast Asia during the 1968 Tet Offensive. Meanwhile Vallée's own journal chronology has him in Saint-Germain, Edinburgh and New Jersey during 1968, before arriving at Stanford in 1969. More damaging still, Forbidden Science 3 gives us what looks like Vallée's introduction to McMoneagle on March 24, 1988: Ed May came over for dinner… bringing the best remote viewer in the Army, Joe McMoneagle. McMoneagle would have been 42, not 22. That wording isn't absolute proof they'd never met before, but it sure reads like Vallée was being introduced to him. So despite Vallée declining to answer Ross's McMoneagle guess, I now think Joe is substantially less likely than I did yesterday. Edwin May gets even weaker May earned his physics B.S. in 1962 and Ph.D. in 1968. He didn't become seriously involved in parapsychology until the mid-1970s. Vallée's diary has him dealing with May at SRI on November 6, 1980, and repeatedly thereafter. For May to be Gilbert, Vallée would apparently have had to meet him when May was approximately college age around 1962, years before May entered the psi field and when Vallée had only just arrived in America. I found nothing connecting them then. That makes the recent cryptic ED-WI-N MAY interpretation of Rhys Dalton-Morgan's (Rhys Dalton-Morgan) clue much less persuasive to me. It may be clever wordplay, but biography should trump wordplay. And the Costa Rica clue produced a surprise I reconstructed Vallée's October 1985 San José, Costa Rica trip because it initially seemed like the obvious “we crossed paths in Central America” event. Vallée's diary specifically mentions people including John Keel, Andrija Puharich, Charles Berlitz, Salvador Freixedo, Javier Cabrera, Enrique Castillo and others. There's even a surviving caption for a photograph of Vallée there with Keel, Freixedo, Berlitz and Castillo. But I can find no Gary Langford, Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray or Stephan Schwartz associated with that meeting. That's useful negative evidence. It suggests that when Vallée says he and Gilbert crossed paths “in Central America and elsewhere over the years,” he probably wasn't simply referring to the famous 1985 Costa Rica conference—unless Gilbert attended privately or wasn't listed. That means Central America may ultimately be the clue that cracks this. Where I stand now My working order has changed substantially: Gary O. Langford → unknown/obscure SRI or intelligence viewer → Bill Ray → McMoneagle → Edwin May → Stephan Schwartz. And I'd put a sizeable gap after Langford—but not because we have enough evidence to say Langford is Gilbert. We don't. It's because Langford is the one named candidate for whom the age-22 clue could line up naturally with Vallée's life and who also checks the boxes of accomplished viewer, SRI connection, classified/intelligence environment, scientific background and unusual discretion. There's also something potentially very important buried in Vallée's wording. He doesn't merely say “I knew him when he was 22.” He says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” That's a datable event. If Gary Langford turns out to have been born around 1946–47, then we should immediately search Vallée's 1968–70 orbit—Stanford, SRI, Berkeley, computer-science circles, astronomy circles, parapsychology contacts—for their first encounter. If Langford turns out to have been born significantly earlier or later, we can probably cross him off. So that's the next key piece I'd want: Gary O. Langford's publicly documented birth year or evidence establishing his age around his 1969 Berkeley graduation, followed by any evidence of a Langford/Vallée connection before the SRI references we've already found. I would also search Vallée's less-famous Central American travel—not just the 1985 conference—for Langford or another government viewer. At this stage, Gary Langford is the lead I would pursue hardest. And this is substantially stronger than the case I had for him before we incorporated Vallée's “22” statement. If anything new from Vallée, Coulthart, Dalton-Morgan, or the “Gilbert” interview project surfaces, I can also monitor it and flag anything that changes this identification picture.

Joe Murgia

35,282 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce

Dogs and wolves split apart at least 15,000 years ago. Then a golden retriever met a wolf pup, and did something his own owner says terrified him. 97 seconds. Sound on. Watch the video BEFORE you read another word. Then come back. I'll show you why this clip is stranger, and far more important, than it looks. (Long read. Bookmark it now. You'll want it later.) . I'm not going to tell you what happens in that video. Not one spoiler. Not a hint. Because the video does its own work, and it does it better than any caption I could write. What I can do is show you the invisible layer underneath it. The biology. The history. The 15,000 years of evolution that were supposed to make a moment like this impossible. When you press play, you are not watching two animals. You are watching two completely different answers to the same question, standing in the same yard. The question is: what does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? Read on. Then watch again. It will hit differently the second time. I guarantee it. . PART 1. THE SPLIT Let's start with the number that should bother you. Fifteen thousand years. Possibly forty thousand. Scientists still argue about the exact date, and they argue loudly. Somewhere in that window, a population of ancient wolves, one that no longer exists anywhere on Earth, forked into two paths. One path led to the wolf you know from documentaries. Wary. Silent in the trees. Built to survive without us. The other path led to the animal sleeping on your couch. Here's what almost nobody realizes: your dog did not descend from the modern gray wolf. Both descend from a shared ancestor that vanished. Dogs and wolves are less like parent and child, more like cousins who grew up in different countries and stopped speaking the same language. And yet their DNA is almost identical. Different by a sliver. They can even interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Biologically, the gap between them is tiny. Behaviorally, the gap is an ocean. In 2017, a Princeton-led team compared the genomes of dogs and wolves and found something eerie. Dogs carry differences in a region of the genome that, in humans, is linked to Williams-Beuren syndrome. It's a condition famous for one trait above all others: extreme, almost unstoppable friendliness. Researchers are still debating what it means. But the idea is staggering. Dogs may not just be tamer wolves. They may be wolves with a dial turned all the way up on one thing: wanting to be near us. Wolves never got that dial. Hold that thought. It matters more than you think. . PART 2. THE DOG WHO WAS BUILT TO BE GENTLE Now meet the golden retriever. He wasn't found in nature. He was designed. In the mid-1800s, on a vast estate in the Scottish Highlands, a wealthy lord named Dudley Marjoribanks set out to create the perfect gundog. A dog that would swim into cold water, find a fallen bird, and bring it back to the hunter without leaving a single tooth mark on it. Read that again. The defining feature of a golden retriever is what breeders call a soft mouth. A dog that can carry something fragile, something alive or nearly alive, in its jaws, and not crush it. For generations, the goldens who were gentlest got to breed. The ones who were rough didn't. Think about what that does over 150 years. You are not just selecting for a coat color or a size. You are selecting, again and again, for restraint. For an animal that has power in its jaws and chooses not to use it. Today the golden retriever guides the blind. Sits with the dying. Finds people buried under rubble. Walks into hospital rooms and lowers a blood pressure reading just by resting its head on a bed. We took a predator and, over centuries, we bred one question out of it: should I hurt this thing? The golden's answer is almost always no. Now here's the part I can't stop thinking about. That gentleness was never aimed at a wolf. It was bred for birds. For children. For us. So what happens when an animal engineered for tenderness meets an animal that was never engineered for anything, one that is still, in every cell, exactly what the wild made it? That's the video. Go watch it if you haven't. I'll be here. . PART 3. THE ANIMAL THAT WAS NEVER ASKED A wolf pup is born blind and deaf. It weighs about a pound. For its first weeks it knows three things: warmth, milk, and the smell of the pack. Its eyes open at around two weeks, and they are blue. They will change to gold or amber within the first months of life, like a color being poured in slowly. In the wild, that pup is raised by an entire family. Mother, father, older siblings, all of them feeding, guarding, teaching. Forget the "alpha wolf" myth you were taught. The biologist who popularized that term, David Mech, spent decades correcting himself. A wild pack is not a gang with a boss. It's a family. A breeding pair and their kids. Which means a wolf pup's entire universe is built around one idea: the pack is everything. Now think about what it means when that universe collapses. Here's the hard science on why wolves aren't dogs, even when humans raise them from the earliest days. Researchers who want socialized wolves take pups from the den at around ten days old and hand-raise them around the clock. Bottle. Warmth. Constant human contact. It's the closest thing to a perfect human upbringing a wolf can get. In a famous 2003 experiment in Hungary, scientists gave hand-raised wolves and ordinary dogs an impossible puzzle: food locked in a box that couldn't be opened. The dogs did something instantly recognizable. They turned around and looked at the nearest human. Straight at the face. Help me. The wolves, raised by humans since they were days old, looked at people far less. They kept working the problem alone. Let that sink in. Same upbringing. Same people. Same room. And still: one animal looks to us for help by instinct, and the other doesn't think to. That's the dial I mentioned. It isn't something you can install with love and a bottle. It took thousands of years of living beside us. There's a legendary experiment that proves how deep this goes. In 1959, in Siberia, a geneticist named Dmitri Belyaev started breeding silver foxes. He selected for exactly one trait: tameness. Nothing else. No looks, no size, no color. Within a handful of generations, the foxes started wagging their tails. Licking hands. Whining when humans left. Then something nobody asked for started happening. Floppy ears. Curly tails. Piebald coats. Foxes that looked like puppies. Pick for friendliness alone, and a whole different animal surfaces. It took decades of careful selection to make a fox that wants us. Which brings me to the question that makes this video so unsettling. If wanting a human is a trait that takes generations to build, what happens when an animal WITHOUT it forms a bond anyway? And who is that bond really with? . PART 4. THE NOSE THAT READS THE FUTURE Before I say another word about the video, let me tell you about the most underrated superpower in the animal kingdom. You have about six million scent receptors in your nose. A dog has around three hundred million. The part of a dog's brain that processes smell is, proportionally, dozens of times larger than yours. Dogs can detect certain odors at parts per trillion. Picture spotting a teaspoon of sugar dissolved in two Olympic swimming pools. But smell isn't the interesting part. The interesting part is what a dog smells ABOUT YOU. In 2022, researchers at Queen's University Belfast collected breath and sweat samples from people before and after they did stressful math tests. Then they trained dogs to tell the samples apart. The dogs picked out the stressed samples correctly about 94 percent of the time. Your dog can smell your cortisol. Your fear. Your dread. And here's the thing. You don't have to say anything. You don't have to cry. You can hold a perfectly calm face while your body chemistry is screaming. Now add routine. Dogs are pattern-recognition machines. They know what your keys sound like, what a suitcase means, which shoes you wear when you're leaving for an hour and which shoes you wear when you're leaving for good. Neuroscientist Gregory Berns put dogs in brain scanners and found that the reward center of a dog's brain lit up most strongly for the scent of a familiar person. Not a stranger. Not another dog. The person they loved. So when I tell you a dog can KNOW something is coming before anyone speaks, I'm not being poetic. I'm describing chemistry, memory, and pattern, running in parallel, faster than you can think. There's a moment in this video where you'll understand this section in your bones. I won't tell you when it is. You'll feel it. . PART 5. THE EYES Here is a fact that rewires how you see your own dog. In 2015, a Japanese team published a study in Science that stopped a lot of people cold. They found that when a dog and its owner look into each other's eyes, both of them get a surge of oxytocin. The bonding hormone. The same one that floods a new mother when she looks at her baby. A loop. Dog looks at you, your oxytocin rises, you look back, the dog's rises. Two nervous systems tuning to each other through nothing but a stare. And here's the twist that gives me chills. The same team tried it with hand-raised wolves and their human caretakers. The loop didn't form. The wolves didn't hold the gaze the same way. The humans didn't get the same hormone hit. Something that comes naturally between a dog and a person simply wasn't there. It gets stranger. In 2019, researchers published a paper in PNAS showing that dogs have a tiny facial muscle above the inner corner of the eyes that wolves essentially lack. It's the muscle that lifts the inner eyebrow. It's what creates the "puppy eyes" look that makes you feel something you can't argue with. A muscle. Evolved, apparently, for one audience: us. Shelter research backs it up. Dogs that make that expression more often tend to get adopted faster. Dogs learned to speak human with their faces. So eye contact, for a dog, is not a small thing. It's the deepest sentence in the language they invented for us. Which is why, when you watch this video, I want you to pay attention to something most people miss the first time. Watch the eyes. Watch who looks at whom. Watch who doesn't. Because in the dog's language, refusing to look at someone you love is one of the loudest things you can say. . PART 6. THE BOWL Ask any dog behaviorist what the ultimate test of trust between two canines is, and you'll hear the same word. Food. Resource guarding is one of the oldest, most primal instincts a dog has. Food is survival. A dog that doesn't defend its meal was, for most of history, a dog that didn't make it. Growls over a bone are not rudeness. They are ancient math. So the bowl is sacred. In a home with two dogs, watch who eats first, who eats faster, who stands too close, who gets a warning stare. A shared bowl between two animals is a peace treaty signed in kibble. Some dogs will happily share toys, beds, even the couch, and still lock up the moment a bowl hits the floor. Some never share it. Not once. Not with anyone. Now put a wolf pup in that picture. A wolf pup that has known real hunger. Or no mother at all. Or no pack. That's an animal for whom food is not a snack. It's a verdict on whether the world is safe. And put a dog who has never, ever shared his food in that same room. I'm not going to tell you what happens next. But when you get to that moment in the video, and you will know it when you see it, remember this section. Remember what the bowl means. . Pause for a second, because a pattern is forming. Smell tells a dog what's coming. Eyes tell him who matters. The bowl tells him who's safe. Play tells him who's family. Four separate systems, one conclusion, and it's the same conclusion every time. You now know how to read the language. All that's left is to watch someone speak it, with everything on the line. . PART 7. THE GRIEF NOBODY BELIEVED IN For most of the twentieth century, serious scientists were warned not to say that animals feel grief. The word for the sin was anthropomorphism. Projecting human feelings onto beasts. You could lose credibility for even suggesting it. And then the data started rolling in. In 1925, a Tokyo professor named Hidesaburo Ueno died suddenly at work. His Akita, Hachiko, who had walked him to Shibuya Station every morning and met him at the platform every evening, showed up at the station the next day. And the next. For nine years, nine months, and fifteen days. Every single evening. Until his own death in 1935. The Japanese made a statue. The world made movies. But the scientists stayed cautious. One dog. Could be habit. Then in 2022, a team in Italy studied hundreds of multi-dog households where one dog had died. Owners reported that the surviving dogs changed. They sought more attention. They played less. They were less active. Many showed sleep and appetite changes. Not proof of grief exactly as we feel it. Scientists are still honest about that gap. But proof that the loss of a companion reshapes a dog's whole behavior. Here's the honest version, and I'll give you both sides: skeptics say we can't know what a dog feels inside. That's fair. We can't. We can only observe behavior, hormones, brain activity. But if a dog changes when a friend disappears, then that friend was never "just another animal" to him. Which raises the question the video quietly asks: What happens when a dog can see the loss coming? Not after. Before. Does the grief start early? Watch and decide for yourself. . PART 8. PLAY IS A CONTRACT Every canine on Earth speaks one shared language of play, and it's older than domestication itself. It starts with a bow. Front legs down, rear end up, tail high. The famous play bow. Researchers, especially the biologist Marc Bekoff, spent years studying it and found that it works like a punctuation mark. It means: everything I do after this is a game. If I bite, it's not a real bite. If I pounce, it's not an attack. It's a contract. And here's the wild part: wolves use it. Foxes use it. Coyotes use it. Dogs use it. The signal predates the split I told you about in Part 1. Which means a dog and a wolf can meet, with 15,000 years of divergence between them, and still understand each other's opening move. It gets deeper. Play is a negotiation between unequals. A big dog playing with a smaller one will often hold back. Roll over. Let the little one "win." Researchers call it self-handicapping. It's the animal version of a father lifting his daughter onto his shoulders and letting her win the race. And they role-reverse. The chaser becomes the chased. The one on top ends up underneath. That only happens if both animals believe the other is safe. Play, in the animal kingdom, is the most honest test of trust there is. Nobody can fake it. You can't roleplay tenderness with a body that has fangs. You either mean it, or the game collapses in seconds. And it changes as the years go on. Puppies play like puppies. Then they grow. Their size changes. Their strength changes. Their jaws change. The game has to change with them, or it ends. Some friendships don't survive that. Some survive by getting more careful, more precise, more competitive, and somehow more loving at the same time. The end of this video is a masterclass in that. I'll leave it there. . PART 9. THE HARDEST KIND OF LOVE Now the uncomfortable part. The part the internet often skips. Wolves are not pets. Say it out loud and it sounds obvious. But every year, people fall in love with the idea of a wolf, and every year the story ends badly for the animal. A wolf is built to cover up to thirty miles in a day. To live in a family of its own kind. To communicate with howls that carry for miles. Its jaws, its instincts, its stress responses, its needs are those of a wild animal. A house cannot hold that. A backyard cannot hold that. Love, however genuine, is not a substitute for what a wolf actually needs. And here's the tragic loop wildlife rescuers talk about: an orphaned wolf pup that grows up around humans is often too habituated to ever be released. It didn't learn what its mother would have taught it. It doesn't fear what it should fear. So the "rescue" can't end in the forest. It has to end somewhere in between. Somewhere that isn't the wild and isn't a living room. A place built for what this animal is. That's where the real story lives. Not in the rescue. In the decision after. Because the hardest thing in the world isn't loving something. It's loving something enough to hand it to the people who can give it the life it needs, and then living with the hole that leaves. People get torn apart over decisions like that. Not because they didn't love the animal. Because they did. Sometimes the most loving act looks exactly like loss. And here is what stopped me. The human in this story wasn't the only one who understood that. Somebody else in that story understood it too. Somebody with four legs and no ability to speak. I won't say who. I won't say how. Just watch. . PART 10. WHY YOUR CHEST TIGHTENS Have you noticed something strange about videos like this? They don't make you sad exactly. They make you feel something warmer. A tightness in the chest. Goosebumps on your arms. Sometimes a sudden hot wetness at the corners of your eyes, and you don't know why. Psychologists have a name for it now. Kama muta. It's Sanskrit for "moved by love." The researcher who helped define it, Alan Fiske, argues that it's triggered by one specific thing: the sudden intensification of a bond. A reunion. A reconciliation. A loyalty proven under pressure. A stranger becoming family. That moment when two beings who could have stayed apart choose each other anyway. Across cultures and languages, the physical signature keeps showing up: chills, tears, warmth in the chest, a lump in the throat. It isn't sadness. It isn't happiness. It's the feeling of witnessing connection get stronger. Another psychologist, Jonathan Haidt, calls a cousin of it moral elevation. That warm lift you feel when you watch someone do something unexpectedly good. It makes you want to be better. Kinder. It literally makes people more likely to help others afterward. So why do animals trigger it so powerfully? Because animals strip out everything we distrust in human stories. No agenda. No performance. No PR. No "what's in it for me." A dog can't fake loyalty for likes. A wolf can't pretend to love you for status. When two animals from opposite ends of evolution choose each other, we're watching the purest version of the thing we hunger for in our own lives, in a form we can trust. That's why you'll feel it. That's why you'll want to show it to someone right after. And that's why the algorithm will keep showing it to you. . PART 11. SIXTEEN FACTS THAT WILL CHANGE HOW YOU SEE THIS CLIP FACT 1. For every wild wolf on Earth, there are thousands of dogs. One branch of the family tree took over the planet by befriending us. The other stayed wild and stayed rare. FACT 2. Wolf pups are born with blue eyes. Adult wolves usually have gold or amber. Nobody sees the change happen. It just does. FACT 3. Wolves rarely bark. Barking is mostly a dog invention, and one theory says it evolved largely to talk to humans. FACT 4. A dog's tail wag isn't just "happy." Research suggests a wag skewed to the right side tends to signal approach and comfort, and one skewed to the left signals hesitation or stress. A dog is broadcasting its mood in code, and you were never taught to read it. FACT 5. Dogs catch human yawns. Wolves catch yawns from each other, and more so from the ones they're closest to. Contagious yawning tracks emotional closeness, not just habit. FACT 6. A wolf can eat up to twenty pounds of meat in one sitting. Then not eat properly for days. Feast and famine is written into its body. FACT 7. In a dog's brain, praise only lights up the reward center when BOTH the words and the tone are right. Say "good boy" in a flat voice and it doesn't fully land. Dogs process what you say and how you say it separately, then combine them. FACT 8. A wild wolf lives roughly six to eight years. A golden retriever lives ten to twelve. One of them is built for hardship. The other is built for company. FACT 9. Dogs combine faces and voices to read emotion. In one study, dogs shown two human faces while hearing a voice looked longer at the face whose emotion matched the sound. FACT 10. A border collie named Chaser learned the names of more than 1,000 toys, and could pick out a brand-new one by pure elimination. That's reasoning, not tricks. FACT 11. Wolves in a wild pack are a family, not an army. The pups eat, the parents hunt, the older siblings babysit. The word "alpha" mostly belongs to captive wolves forced together, not wild ones. FACT 12. A dog's nose print is as unique as a human fingerprint. So is its bond with you. FACT 13. Dogs hear frequencies far above what you can, up to roughly 45,000 Hz and beyond. The world around you is full of sound they can't stop noticing. FACT 14. A wolf's paw print can be nearly five inches long. Bigger than most dogs' prints. Yet the golden retriever's heart, by any measure that matters, is not smaller. FACT 15. Dogs dream. They go through REM sleep just like you. The twitching, the tiny barks, the running paws: it's a brain replaying its day. FACT 16. The wolf is the ancestor of the dog only in the loosest sense. Both come from a wolf lineage that no longer exists. When you watch these two, you are watching an ancient family reunion between two branches that lost touch before recorded history. . PART 12. HOW TO WATCH IT (WITHOUT ME SPOILING IT) You've made it this far, which tells me one thing about you. You're not a scroller. You're a noticer. So here's how to watch this clip like someone who knows what they're looking at. FIRST WATCH. Just feel it. Don't analyze. Let the story run at its own speed. The clip is under two minutes and it doesn't waste a second. SECOND WATCH. Focus on distance. Notice how close the animals stand. How that changes. How it never quite changes the way you expect. THIRD WATCH. Focus on the dog. Only the dog. Not what he does. What he refuses to do. FOURTH WATCH. Focus on the ears and the tail. Everything a dog can't say, he says with those two things. And he says a lot. And the last five seconds? Do not skip them. Do not scroll early. Watch the final image and ask yourself one question: If this is what the two of them look like now, what did it cost to get here? . CLOSING. WHY THIS MATTERS MORE THAN A "CUTE VIDEO" Let me leave you with the thought that made me write all of this. We live in a world that constantly tells us bonds are transactional. That loyalty is naive. That people, and animals, only love you when you're useful. Then along comes a story like this, and it quietly breaks that theory. A dog engineered for gentleness. A wolf engineered by nothing but the wild. Fifteen thousand years of evolution between them, a wall of biology that says they should be strangers, or worse. And instead: a bond so strong that the humans standing around it were afraid of what it would cost. Not because anyone was in danger. Because one of them understood exactly what was at stake. That's the thing about animals. They don't need the science. They don't need Part 1 through Part 12. They don't know about oxytocin loops or kama muta or play bows. They just know who matters. And they act on it, immediately, with everything they've got. Maybe that's the real reason this kind of video travels the way it does. Not because it's cute. Because it reminds us of a level of loyalty we've quietly stopped expecting from each other. So do these three things. ONE. Go watch the video. All 97 seconds. Sound on. TWO. Come back and reply with the exact moment you felt it. I want the second, the caption, the look. Tell me where it got you. THREE. Send it to one person who needs to see what love looks like when nobody is performing it. You know who. Repost this if the video moved you. Follow me for more stories where science and animals collide. And remember the question from the top of this post, because now you can answer it. What does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? If you watched carefully, you already know. If you didn't, go back. The answer is in the last frame.
1:37

Dogs and wolves split apart at least 15,000 years ago. Then a golden retriever met a wolf pup, and did something his own owner says terrified him. 97 seconds. Sound on. Watch the video BEFORE you read another word. Then come back. I'll show you why this clip is stranger, and far more important, than it looks. (Long read. Bookmark it now. You'll want it later.) . I'm not going to tell you what happens in that video. Not one spoiler. Not a hint. Because the video does its own work, and it does it better than any caption I could write. What I can do is show you the invisible layer underneath it. The biology. The history. The 15,000 years of evolution that were supposed to make a moment like this impossible. When you press play, you are not watching two animals. You are watching two completely different answers to the same question, standing in the same yard. The question is: what does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? Read on. Then watch again. It will hit differently the second time. I guarantee it. . PART 1. THE SPLIT Let's start with the number that should bother you. Fifteen thousand years. Possibly forty thousand. Scientists still argue about the exact date, and they argue loudly. Somewhere in that window, a population of ancient wolves, one that no longer exists anywhere on Earth, forked into two paths. One path led to the wolf you know from documentaries. Wary. Silent in the trees. Built to survive without us. The other path led to the animal sleeping on your couch. Here's what almost nobody realizes: your dog did not descend from the modern gray wolf. Both descend from a shared ancestor that vanished. Dogs and wolves are less like parent and child, more like cousins who grew up in different countries and stopped speaking the same language. And yet their DNA is almost identical. Different by a sliver. They can even interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Biologically, the gap between them is tiny. Behaviorally, the gap is an ocean. In 2017, a Princeton-led team compared the genomes of dogs and wolves and found something eerie. Dogs carry differences in a region of the genome that, in humans, is linked to Williams-Beuren syndrome. It's a condition famous for one trait above all others: extreme, almost unstoppable friendliness. Researchers are still debating what it means. But the idea is staggering. Dogs may not just be tamer wolves. They may be wolves with a dial turned all the way up on one thing: wanting to be near us. Wolves never got that dial. Hold that thought. It matters more than you think. . PART 2. THE DOG WHO WAS BUILT TO BE GENTLE Now meet the golden retriever. He wasn't found in nature. He was designed. In the mid-1800s, on a vast estate in the Scottish Highlands, a wealthy lord named Dudley Marjoribanks set out to create the perfect gundog. A dog that would swim into cold water, find a fallen bird, and bring it back to the hunter without leaving a single tooth mark on it. Read that again. The defining feature of a golden retriever is what breeders call a soft mouth. A dog that can carry something fragile, something alive or nearly alive, in its jaws, and not crush it. For generations, the goldens who were gentlest got to breed. The ones who were rough didn't. Think about what that does over 150 years. You are not just selecting for a coat color or a size. You are selecting, again and again, for restraint. For an animal that has power in its jaws and chooses not to use it. Today the golden retriever guides the blind. Sits with the dying. Finds people buried under rubble. Walks into hospital rooms and lowers a blood pressure reading just by resting its head on a bed. We took a predator and, over centuries, we bred one question out of it: should I hurt this thing? The golden's answer is almost always no. Now here's the part I can't stop thinking about. That gentleness was never aimed at a wolf. It was bred for birds. For children. For us. So what happens when an animal engineered for tenderness meets an animal that was never engineered for anything, one that is still, in every cell, exactly what the wild made it? That's the video. Go watch it if you haven't. I'll be here. . PART 3. THE ANIMAL THAT WAS NEVER ASKED A wolf pup is born blind and deaf. It weighs about a pound. For its first weeks it knows three things: warmth, milk, and the smell of the pack. Its eyes open at around two weeks, and they are blue. They will change to gold or amber within the first months of life, like a color being poured in slowly. In the wild, that pup is raised by an entire family. Mother, father, older siblings, all of them feeding, guarding, teaching. Forget the "alpha wolf" myth you were taught. The biologist who popularized that term, David Mech, spent decades correcting himself. A wild pack is not a gang with a boss. It's a family. A breeding pair and their kids. Which means a wolf pup's entire universe is built around one idea: the pack is everything. Now think about what it means when that universe collapses. Here's the hard science on why wolves aren't dogs, even when humans raise them from the earliest days. Researchers who want socialized wolves take pups from the den at around ten days old and hand-raise them around the clock. Bottle. Warmth. Constant human contact. It's the closest thing to a perfect human upbringing a wolf can get. In a famous 2003 experiment in Hungary, scientists gave hand-raised wolves and ordinary dogs an impossible puzzle: food locked in a box that couldn't be opened. The dogs did something instantly recognizable. They turned around and looked at the nearest human. Straight at the face. Help me. The wolves, raised by humans since they were days old, looked at people far less. They kept working the problem alone. Let that sink in. Same upbringing. Same people. Same room. And still: one animal looks to us for help by instinct, and the other doesn't think to. That's the dial I mentioned. It isn't something you can install with love and a bottle. It took thousands of years of living beside us. There's a legendary experiment that proves how deep this goes. In 1959, in Siberia, a geneticist named Dmitri Belyaev started breeding silver foxes. He selected for exactly one trait: tameness. Nothing else. No looks, no size, no color. Within a handful of generations, the foxes started wagging their tails. Licking hands. Whining when humans left. Then something nobody asked for started happening. Floppy ears. Curly tails. Piebald coats. Foxes that looked like puppies. Pick for friendliness alone, and a whole different animal surfaces. It took decades of careful selection to make a fox that wants us. Which brings me to the question that makes this video so unsettling. If wanting a human is a trait that takes generations to build, what happens when an animal WITHOUT it forms a bond anyway? And who is that bond really with? . PART 4. THE NOSE THAT READS THE FUTURE Before I say another word about the video, let me tell you about the most underrated superpower in the animal kingdom. You have about six million scent receptors in your nose. A dog has around three hundred million. The part of a dog's brain that processes smell is, proportionally, dozens of times larger than yours. Dogs can detect certain odors at parts per trillion. Picture spotting a teaspoon of sugar dissolved in two Olympic swimming pools. But smell isn't the interesting part. The interesting part is what a dog smells ABOUT YOU. In 2022, researchers at Queen's University Belfast collected breath and sweat samples from people before and after they did stressful math tests. Then they trained dogs to tell the samples apart. The dogs picked out the stressed samples correctly about 94 percent of the time. Your dog can smell your cortisol. Your fear. Your dread. And here's the thing. You don't have to say anything. You don't have to cry. You can hold a perfectly calm face while your body chemistry is screaming. Now add routine. Dogs are pattern-recognition machines. They know what your keys sound like, what a suitcase means, which shoes you wear when you're leaving for an hour and which shoes you wear when you're leaving for good. Neuroscientist Gregory Berns put dogs in brain scanners and found that the reward center of a dog's brain lit up most strongly for the scent of a familiar person. Not a stranger. Not another dog. The person they loved. So when I tell you a dog can KNOW something is coming before anyone speaks, I'm not being poetic. I'm describing chemistry, memory, and pattern, running in parallel, faster than you can think. There's a moment in this video where you'll understand this section in your bones. I won't tell you when it is. You'll feel it. . PART 5. THE EYES Here is a fact that rewires how you see your own dog. In 2015, a Japanese team published a study in Science that stopped a lot of people cold. They found that when a dog and its owner look into each other's eyes, both of them get a surge of oxytocin. The bonding hormone. The same one that floods a new mother when she looks at her baby. A loop. Dog looks at you, your oxytocin rises, you look back, the dog's rises. Two nervous systems tuning to each other through nothing but a stare. And here's the twist that gives me chills. The same team tried it with hand-raised wolves and their human caretakers. The loop didn't form. The wolves didn't hold the gaze the same way. The humans didn't get the same hormone hit. Something that comes naturally between a dog and a person simply wasn't there. It gets stranger. In 2019, researchers published a paper in PNAS showing that dogs have a tiny facial muscle above the inner corner of the eyes that wolves essentially lack. It's the muscle that lifts the inner eyebrow. It's what creates the "puppy eyes" look that makes you feel something you can't argue with. A muscle. Evolved, apparently, for one audience: us. Shelter research backs it up. Dogs that make that expression more often tend to get adopted faster. Dogs learned to speak human with their faces. So eye contact, for a dog, is not a small thing. It's the deepest sentence in the language they invented for us. Which is why, when you watch this video, I want you to pay attention to something most people miss the first time. Watch the eyes. Watch who looks at whom. Watch who doesn't. Because in the dog's language, refusing to look at someone you love is one of the loudest things you can say. . PART 6. THE BOWL Ask any dog behaviorist what the ultimate test of trust between two canines is, and you'll hear the same word. Food. Resource guarding is one of the oldest, most primal instincts a dog has. Food is survival. A dog that doesn't defend its meal was, for most of history, a dog that didn't make it. Growls over a bone are not rudeness. They are ancient math. So the bowl is sacred. In a home with two dogs, watch who eats first, who eats faster, who stands too close, who gets a warning stare. A shared bowl between two animals is a peace treaty signed in kibble. Some dogs will happily share toys, beds, even the couch, and still lock up the moment a bowl hits the floor. Some never share it. Not once. Not with anyone. Now put a wolf pup in that picture. A wolf pup that has known real hunger. Or no mother at all. Or no pack. That's an animal for whom food is not a snack. It's a verdict on whether the world is safe. And put a dog who has never, ever shared his food in that same room. I'm not going to tell you what happens next. But when you get to that moment in the video, and you will know it when you see it, remember this section. Remember what the bowl means. . Pause for a second, because a pattern is forming. Smell tells a dog what's coming. Eyes tell him who matters. The bowl tells him who's safe. Play tells him who's family. Four separate systems, one conclusion, and it's the same conclusion every time. You now know how to read the language. All that's left is to watch someone speak it, with everything on the line. . PART 7. THE GRIEF NOBODY BELIEVED IN For most of the twentieth century, serious scientists were warned not to say that animals feel grief. The word for the sin was anthropomorphism. Projecting human feelings onto beasts. You could lose credibility for even suggesting it. And then the data started rolling in. In 1925, a Tokyo professor named Hidesaburo Ueno died suddenly at work. His Akita, Hachiko, who had walked him to Shibuya Station every morning and met him at the platform every evening, showed up at the station the next day. And the next. For nine years, nine months, and fifteen days. Every single evening. Until his own death in 1935. The Japanese made a statue. The world made movies. But the scientists stayed cautious. One dog. Could be habit. Then in 2022, a team in Italy studied hundreds of multi-dog households where one dog had died. Owners reported that the surviving dogs changed. They sought more attention. They played less. They were less active. Many showed sleep and appetite changes. Not proof of grief exactly as we feel it. Scientists are still honest about that gap. But proof that the loss of a companion reshapes a dog's whole behavior. Here's the honest version, and I'll give you both sides: skeptics say we can't know what a dog feels inside. That's fair. We can't. We can only observe behavior, hormones, brain activity. But if a dog changes when a friend disappears, then that friend was never "just another animal" to him. Which raises the question the video quietly asks: What happens when a dog can see the loss coming? Not after. Before. Does the grief start early? Watch and decide for yourself. . PART 8. PLAY IS A CONTRACT Every canine on Earth speaks one shared language of play, and it's older than domestication itself. It starts with a bow. Front legs down, rear end up, tail high. The famous play bow. Researchers, especially the biologist Marc Bekoff, spent years studying it and found that it works like a punctuation mark. It means: everything I do after this is a game. If I bite, it's not a real bite. If I pounce, it's not an attack. It's a contract. And here's the wild part: wolves use it. Foxes use it. Coyotes use it. Dogs use it. The signal predates the split I told you about in Part 1. Which means a dog and a wolf can meet, with 15,000 years of divergence between them, and still understand each other's opening move. It gets deeper. Play is a negotiation between unequals. A big dog playing with a smaller one will often hold back. Roll over. Let the little one "win." Researchers call it self-handicapping. It's the animal version of a father lifting his daughter onto his shoulders and letting her win the race. And they role-reverse. The chaser becomes the chased. The one on top ends up underneath. That only happens if both animals believe the other is safe. Play, in the animal kingdom, is the most honest test of trust there is. Nobody can fake it. You can't roleplay tenderness with a body that has fangs. You either mean it, or the game collapses in seconds. And it changes as the years go on. Puppies play like puppies. Then they grow. Their size changes. Their strength changes. Their jaws change. The game has to change with them, or it ends. Some friendships don't survive that. Some survive by getting more careful, more precise, more competitive, and somehow more loving at the same time. The end of this video is a masterclass in that. I'll leave it there. . PART 9. THE HARDEST KIND OF LOVE Now the uncomfortable part. The part the internet often skips. Wolves are not pets. Say it out loud and it sounds obvious. But every year, people fall in love with the idea of a wolf, and every year the story ends badly for the animal. A wolf is built to cover up to thirty miles in a day. To live in a family of its own kind. To communicate with howls that carry for miles. Its jaws, its instincts, its stress responses, its needs are those of a wild animal. A house cannot hold that. A backyard cannot hold that. Love, however genuine, is not a substitute for what a wolf actually needs. And here's the tragic loop wildlife rescuers talk about: an orphaned wolf pup that grows up around humans is often too habituated to ever be released. It didn't learn what its mother would have taught it. It doesn't fear what it should fear. So the "rescue" can't end in the forest. It has to end somewhere in between. Somewhere that isn't the wild and isn't a living room. A place built for what this animal is. That's where the real story lives. Not in the rescue. In the decision after. Because the hardest thing in the world isn't loving something. It's loving something enough to hand it to the people who can give it the life it needs, and then living with the hole that leaves. People get torn apart over decisions like that. Not because they didn't love the animal. Because they did. Sometimes the most loving act looks exactly like loss. And here is what stopped me. The human in this story wasn't the only one who understood that. Somebody else in that story understood it too. Somebody with four legs and no ability to speak. I won't say who. I won't say how. Just watch. . PART 10. WHY YOUR CHEST TIGHTENS Have you noticed something strange about videos like this? They don't make you sad exactly. They make you feel something warmer. A tightness in the chest. Goosebumps on your arms. Sometimes a sudden hot wetness at the corners of your eyes, and you don't know why. Psychologists have a name for it now. Kama muta. It's Sanskrit for "moved by love." The researcher who helped define it, Alan Fiske, argues that it's triggered by one specific thing: the sudden intensification of a bond. A reunion. A reconciliation. A loyalty proven under pressure. A stranger becoming family. That moment when two beings who could have stayed apart choose each other anyway. Across cultures and languages, the physical signature keeps showing up: chills, tears, warmth in the chest, a lump in the throat. It isn't sadness. It isn't happiness. It's the feeling of witnessing connection get stronger. Another psychologist, Jonathan Haidt, calls a cousin of it moral elevation. That warm lift you feel when you watch someone do something unexpectedly good. It makes you want to be better. Kinder. It literally makes people more likely to help others afterward. So why do animals trigger it so powerfully? Because animals strip out everything we distrust in human stories. No agenda. No performance. No PR. No "what's in it for me." A dog can't fake loyalty for likes. A wolf can't pretend to love you for status. When two animals from opposite ends of evolution choose each other, we're watching the purest version of the thing we hunger for in our own lives, in a form we can trust. That's why you'll feel it. That's why you'll want to show it to someone right after. And that's why the algorithm will keep showing it to you. . PART 11. SIXTEEN FACTS THAT WILL CHANGE HOW YOU SEE THIS CLIP FACT 1. For every wild wolf on Earth, there are thousands of dogs. One branch of the family tree took over the planet by befriending us. The other stayed wild and stayed rare. FACT 2. Wolf pups are born with blue eyes. Adult wolves usually have gold or amber. Nobody sees the change happen. It just does. FACT 3. Wolves rarely bark. Barking is mostly a dog invention, and one theory says it evolved largely to talk to humans. FACT 4. A dog's tail wag isn't just "happy." Research suggests a wag skewed to the right side tends to signal approach and comfort, and one skewed to the left signals hesitation or stress. A dog is broadcasting its mood in code, and you were never taught to read it. FACT 5. Dogs catch human yawns. Wolves catch yawns from each other, and more so from the ones they're closest to. Contagious yawning tracks emotional closeness, not just habit. FACT 6. A wolf can eat up to twenty pounds of meat in one sitting. Then not eat properly for days. Feast and famine is written into its body. FACT 7. In a dog's brain, praise only lights up the reward center when BOTH the words and the tone are right. Say "good boy" in a flat voice and it doesn't fully land. Dogs process what you say and how you say it separately, then combine them. FACT 8. A wild wolf lives roughly six to eight years. A golden retriever lives ten to twelve. One of them is built for hardship. The other is built for company. FACT 9. Dogs combine faces and voices to read emotion. In one study, dogs shown two human faces while hearing a voice looked longer at the face whose emotion matched the sound. FACT 10. A border collie named Chaser learned the names of more than 1,000 toys, and could pick out a brand-new one by pure elimination. That's reasoning, not tricks. FACT 11. Wolves in a wild pack are a family, not an army. The pups eat, the parents hunt, the older siblings babysit. The word "alpha" mostly belongs to captive wolves forced together, not wild ones. FACT 12. A dog's nose print is as unique as a human fingerprint. So is its bond with you. FACT 13. Dogs hear frequencies far above what you can, up to roughly 45,000 Hz and beyond. The world around you is full of sound they can't stop noticing. FACT 14. A wolf's paw print can be nearly five inches long. Bigger than most dogs' prints. Yet the golden retriever's heart, by any measure that matters, is not smaller. FACT 15. Dogs dream. They go through REM sleep just like you. The twitching, the tiny barks, the running paws: it's a brain replaying its day. FACT 16. The wolf is the ancestor of the dog only in the loosest sense. Both come from a wolf lineage that no longer exists. When you watch these two, you are watching an ancient family reunion between two branches that lost touch before recorded history. . PART 12. HOW TO WATCH IT (WITHOUT ME SPOILING IT) You've made it this far, which tells me one thing about you. You're not a scroller. You're a noticer. So here's how to watch this clip like someone who knows what they're looking at. FIRST WATCH. Just feel it. Don't analyze. Let the story run at its own speed. The clip is under two minutes and it doesn't waste a second. SECOND WATCH. Focus on distance. Notice how close the animals stand. How that changes. How it never quite changes the way you expect. THIRD WATCH. Focus on the dog. Only the dog. Not what he does. What he refuses to do. FOURTH WATCH. Focus on the ears and the tail. Everything a dog can't say, he says with those two things. And he says a lot. And the last five seconds? Do not skip them. Do not scroll early. Watch the final image and ask yourself one question: If this is what the two of them look like now, what did it cost to get here? . CLOSING. WHY THIS MATTERS MORE THAN A "CUTE VIDEO" Let me leave you with the thought that made me write all of this. We live in a world that constantly tells us bonds are transactional. That loyalty is naive. That people, and animals, only love you when you're useful. Then along comes a story like this, and it quietly breaks that theory. A dog engineered for gentleness. A wolf engineered by nothing but the wild. Fifteen thousand years of evolution between them, a wall of biology that says they should be strangers, or worse. And instead: a bond so strong that the humans standing around it were afraid of what it would cost. Not because anyone was in danger. Because one of them understood exactly what was at stake. That's the thing about animals. They don't need the science. They don't need Part 1 through Part 12. They don't know about oxytocin loops or kama muta or play bows. They just know who matters. And they act on it, immediately, with everything they've got. Maybe that's the real reason this kind of video travels the way it does. Not because it's cute. Because it reminds us of a level of loyalty we've quietly stopped expecting from each other. So do these three things. ONE. Go watch the video. All 97 seconds. Sound on. TWO. Come back and reply with the exact moment you felt it. I want the second, the caption, the look. Tell me where it got you. THREE. Send it to one person who needs to see what love looks like when nobody is performing it. You know who. Repost this if the video moved you. Follow me for more stories where science and animals collide. And remember the question from the top of this post, because now you can answer it. What does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? If you watched carefully, you already know. If you didn't, go back. The answer is in the last frame.

Earth Unveiled

50,253 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce

77 Reasons Why I’ve Invested Over $8,000,000+ in MultiversX (EGLD) and Why EGLD Will Crush It in 2025 (My Investment Thesis). I publicly shared my portfolio on X. EGLD is A) Better than BTC B) Everything that ETH wants to be C) The GameStop of Crypto 1. EGLD is verifiably the most scalable (theoretically unlimited) L1 chain in the world, theoretically capable of over 10 million TPS (thanks to adaptive state sharding). 2. e-Gold is digital gold. It has the best tokenomics among all L1s, similarly scarce to BTC, with a maximum supply of 31.4 million coins. Currently, 27.68 million coins are in circulation. 3. EGLD will be the most decentralized cryptocurrency in the world thanks to sharding and minimal hardware requirements for running nodes. It’s already second only to Ethereum with 3,618 validator nodes. 4. EGLD has extremely low fees, around ~$0.002 per transaction. 5. EGLD is extremely secure. No wallet drains like on ETH/SOL; assets are owned natively (not via a smart contract). There is no MEV risk (front-running bots). 6. EGLD is the only chain in the world with an on-chain Guardian (two-phase verification), making it impossible for a hacker to steal your funds—even if they have your private keys (seed phrase). 7. EGLD is carbon-neutral and eco-friendly, not wasting energy like BTC and other PoW chains. It’s exceptionally efficient, scalable, global, and sustainable. 8. EGLD has the best UX in crypto. Download the xPortal wallet—it’s like discovering Apple in Web3. The interface is simple, flawless, and you barely realize you’re using crypto. Instead of addresses, you use HeroTags. The app features all dApps, everything runs smoothly, and the visuals are beautifully designed. The explorer, web wallet, etc. follow the same high-quality user experience. 9. EGLD supports native assets, unlike Ethereum, for example. 10. EGLD is the first chain to fully implement horizontal (theoretically unlimited) sharding without compromising on decentralization—unlike Solana and others that attempt vertical scaling, leading to multiple network downtimes (11+ times) and huge hardware demands for validators, ultimately harming decentralization. 11. EGLD makes setting up a validator agency extremely easy. Even complete IT beginners can do it. The UX and documentation are superb. I personally set up the “EGLDSqueeze” agency in about 30 minutes. Managing it is straightforward via the web wallet, which feels like managing a Facebook page. This simplifies decentralization enormously. 12. EGLD allows literally anyone (even your grandma) to participate in decentralization, since nodes can run on a Raspberry Pi or a relatively affordable phone. Imagine millions of people worldwide securing the network, validating transactions without even knowing it. This can’t be done with BTC, where setting up profitable mining operations is prohibitively expensive. 13. WASM-Based Virtual Machine: You can write smart contracts in your favorite language, compile them, and run them via the fastest VM in the world. 14. EGLD has been tested at an incredible 263,000 TPS using its sharding mechanism and low hardware requirements. Allegedly, by mid-next year (April), they’ll demonstrate 1,000,000 TPS. (For context: Mastercard handles around 5,000 TPS; BTC handles 5–7 TPS.) 15. EGLD is currently the most advanced L1 in terms of scalability, security, decentralization, UX, eco-friendliness, and tokenomics. It’s the only chain that has genuinely solved the Blockchain Trilemma and is ready to onboard 1 billion people into crypto—users who won’t even realize they’re interacting with crypto. 16. EGLD is perfectly positioned for AI projects—AI agents, AI tools, or a so-called “Truth Machine” that monitors other AIs on-chain, documenting what’s true and comparing different AI outputs (some of which may be censored or biased), ensuring people don’t get confused or scammed in an AI-driven world. 17. The EGLD team is the hardest-working team I’ve ever encountered. I had the honor of meeting many of them personally, and can attest that their pace—even during a bear market—is extraordinary. 18. EGLD’s development team is exceptionally active on GitHub, continually improving their network and actively committing code. 19. EGLD plans to introduce an update reducing block time to 600ms (down from ~6 seconds), which would make the chain essentially unrivaled. 20. EGLD is effectively the only usable L1 in Europe, and the team has direct connections within the EU government—extremely bullish for the project. 21. EGLD provides top-tier on-chain governance not only for the MultiversX (EGLD) protocol but also for DeFi projects (e.g., xExchange, MEX). 22. EGLD plans to expand to the US, likely opening offices in Austin, Texas. This could put them in direct contact with Elon Musk (if it hasn’t happened already), as he’s involved with If he’s done his research, he’d discover there’s simply no better L1 worldwide. 23. EGLD solved fully implemented sharding, perfect tokenomics, and top-tier architecture with just $5M, whereas other chains failed to do so even with $100M+. The second-best sharding network, NEAR, needed $100M, has worse tokenomics, and its sharding isn’t fully implemented yet. Its UX also doesn’t compare. Owning NEAR was like comparing a VW Golf R to a Porsche GT3—EGLD is the Porsche GT3. 24. According to Similarweb, EGLD has significantly high traffic relative to other chains with market caps 100x larger. The market cap vs. web traffic discrepancy is huge, which is a strong indicator of EGLD’s potential. 25. EGLD has the most active and dedicated community relative to its user base, with users who believe in the technology, have full faith in the team, and remain loyal despite price volatility—because they use the chain and know there’s nothing better. 26. Check other chains’ active user counts on X (Twitter) and compare it with the followers of EGLD’s founders and main network accounts, versus those with 30x, 50x, or 100x larger market caps. 27. Visit the MultiversX website to observe the futuristic design and presentation, then compare it to other chains that appear nearly a decade behind in design and branding. 28. EGLD hosts the xDay Global event, showcasing updates, new builders, projects in the ecosystem, and major announcements—similar to Apple’s Keynotes—delivered in a highly professional, goosebump-inducing atmosphere. The next event is in Korea, the second-biggest crypto market after the US. Check out their previous xDay after-movie to see why this is extremely bullish. 29. EGLD is moving forward with plans for the first regulated, audited EU stablecoin under MiCa regulation, made possible by acquiring xMoney, which I view as a “Stripe” for crypto/fiat, offering everything from user solutions to merchant services—potentially the future of payments. 30. Greg Siourouni recently joined EGLD, having been an executive director at SUI Foundation. He’s now co-founder of xMoney Global. xMoney (formerly UTrust, with token UTK) is owned and founded by the MultiversX Labs team. A stablecoin might be introduced soon, which would be massively bullish given xMoney’s roadmap. They recently announced integrations with Binance Pay—both ways. 31. EGLD prioritizes user safety, believing it’s the only feasible approach once the network scales to serve a billion people—many of whom are retail users with little to no security awareness. 32. EGLD offers “Sovereign Chains,” letting you effectively clone their chain without heavy development, set up your own validators, and leverage their unlimited scalability. Any blockchain (ETH, BTC, SOL) struggling with scalability, decentralization, or security could run an ultra-fast, scalable, and secure L2 on EGLD’s Sovereign Chain, meeting top enterprise requirements. No one else has really done this. The Sovereign Chain demo achieved astonishing TPS and has an SDK. 33. No downtime since inception. 34. No shard takeover attacks have occurred. 35. Extremely fast—soon 600ms block time will be in place. 36. ESDTs – The best token standard available: fungible, non-fungible, semi-fungible, DeFi assets—everything is native and highly customizable. 37. Top-tier composability of assets and smart contracts. 38. Integrated DNS at protocol level with HeroTags (nicknames) instead of long addresses. 39. Asynchronous calls are supported. 40. Cross-shard transfers, execution, reverts, and calls are seamlessly integrated. 41. The best staking system in the space. Secure Proof of Stake (SPoS) is far more efficient than Proof of Work (PoW). 42. Built-in Delegation and Staking Provider system, with over 125K delegators. 43. Complete support for liquid staked assets, fostering decentralization rather than centralization. 44. TransferRoles for ESDT and other advanced operations. 45. Composable tasks on-chain for more sophisticated DeFi workflows. 46. MultiTransfer and asset execution within one transaction. 47. Re-entrancy protection is built-in by design. 48. Storage for ESDT assets goes beyond a linear approach, optimizing performance. 49. No integer overflows thanks to integrated safeMath operations. 50. Integrated crypto opcodes in the VM, enhancing security and performance. 51. Support for BigFloats, BigInts, and BigDecimals, enabling advanced financial calculations on-chain. 52. No sandwich attacks, plus front-running and MEV protection. 53. Relayed Transactions, simplifying user interactions and fees. 54. Smart Accounts featuring data tries and multiple built-in functions. 55. Generalized Paymaster solutions, enabling flexible fee models. 56. Subscriptions for recurring or automated on-chain payments. 57. Web2-like usability with Web3 functionality, bridging mainstream adoption. 58. StakingV4 for improved decentralization. 59. Enhanced MEV protection rolling out to safeguard users. 60. Parallel execution is coming soon, boosting throughput. 61. 1 million TPS is on the roadmap, targeted for demonstration. 62. 600ms block time is also coming soon. 63. Reduced cross-shard processing is planned to improve efficiency. 64. ZK everywhere (PI²): “prove everything” approach is coming. 65. AsyncV3 is in development for more complex cross-contract interactions. 66. Scalability enhancements for Merkle Tries or a new data model are being explored. 67. Linear storage on the VM is forthcoming. 68. A dynamic language interpreter at the VM is also planned. 69. Rumors suggest that MultiversX (EGLD) is building a “Truth Machine” on their L1—an essential, game-changing tool for AI verification and societal impact. 70. The entire team features individuals with PhDs in mathematics and physics, and many are former engineers at Google, IBM, and similar companies. 71. Over 56% of the network’s supply is staked, showcasing strong community involvement. 72. More than 6,772,347 accounts have been created on the network. 73. A total of 476,627,710 transactions have been processed on-chain without any outages or hacks. 74. EGLD has built a massive ecosystem over time. While not as numerous in project count as Solana, its market cap is ~100x smaller, yet it has far superior tokenomics and technology. The projects that do exist, like Hatom Protocol, are top-tier in UX, security, and advanced features. Hatom will soon introduce USH, a truly high-quality, decentralized stablecoin. 75. On competing chains, automated transactions aren’t easily or cheaply executed, whereas on MultiversX, tools like let you do this for free (with near-zero fees). 76. No other chain combines such a strong team and long-term vision where every product meets extreme security and UX standards like MultiversX does. This is why I see it as the “next Apple” in Web3. 77. MultiversX has a new CMO – Adam Bates, a former CMO at the Cardano Foundation. He was behind the success of Cardano’s huge marketing campaign and has a very good relationship with Charles Hoskinson. Thanks to him, Beniamin Mincu (the founder of MultiversX) was likely introduced, and now they will probably discuss how both blockchains can help each other, as well as any other potential collaborations we don’t yet know about. This is also extremely bullish. #EGLD is undeniably the most Scalable, Advanced, Secure, and User-friendly L1 supercomputer ever created. It’s built to SHAPE THE FUTURE. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 27/6/2024 - EGLDSqueeze - SUMMARY: HERE IS NO 2ND BEST. EGLD IS ONLY ONE BLOCKCHAIN THAT CAN RULE THEM ALL. ✅ UNLIMITED SCALING ✅ SCARCE AS BTC ✅ PROGRAMMABLE AS ETH ✅ NO DOWNTIME AS SOL ✅ UI/UX OF Apple ✅ SHARDING DONE BEFORE NEAR & TON ✅ BEST WALLET xPortal WITH GUARDIAN Price prediction (NFA|DYOR): My reasoning is that the real market cap as of December 23, 2024...if we take into account the value of other cryptocurrencies such as BTC, SOL, ETH, AVAX, NEAR, TON, Cardano, BNB, XRP, and so forth, plus the existence of meme coins with valuations above 20 billion USD, or even games nobody plays anymore that still have valuations above 800 million shows that EGLD’s current market cap of approximately 942 million USD is incredibly low. From a technological standpoint, user experience, and other relevant aspects, compared to SOL, NEAR, TON, AVAX, and other L1 protocols, EGLD’s market cap should realistically be around 100 billion USD. Therefore, my prediction and investment thesis is a minimum of a 100x increase from its current price (+-SOL marketcap). MultiversX is ready to onboard 1 billion people to the blockchain. From a long-term perspective, it could even reach a market cap of 1 trillion USD, which is roughly half of where BTC is right now. That would be approximately a 1060x gain from the current market cap. 1 EGLD (MultiversX) is for $34 (only 31.4M max supply) think about this. Not financial advice. Again. There is no 2nd best L1. Position yourself where the puck is going, then wait at the goal until the goal gets there Apes together, strong. Ape alone, weak. We Don't Worry. We Just Win. Shape The Future
5:34

77 Reasons Why I’ve Invested Over $8,000,000+ in MultiversX (EGLD) and Why EGLD Will Crush It in 2025 (My Investment Thesis). I publicly shared my portfolio on X. EGLD is A) Better than BTC B) Everything that ETH wants to be C) The GameStop of Crypto 1. EGLD is verifiably the most scalable (theoretically unlimited) L1 chain in the world, theoretically capable of over 10 million TPS (thanks to adaptive state sharding). 2. e-Gold is digital gold. It has the best tokenomics among all L1s, similarly scarce to BTC, with a maximum supply of 31.4 million coins. Currently, 27.68 million coins are in circulation. 3. EGLD will be the most decentralized cryptocurrency in the world thanks to sharding and minimal hardware requirements for running nodes. It’s already second only to Ethereum with 3,618 validator nodes. 4. EGLD has extremely low fees, around ~$0.002 per transaction. 5. EGLD is extremely secure. No wallet drains like on ETH/SOL; assets are owned natively (not via a smart contract). There is no MEV risk (front-running bots). 6. EGLD is the only chain in the world with an on-chain Guardian (two-phase verification), making it impossible for a hacker to steal your funds—even if they have your private keys (seed phrase). 7. EGLD is carbon-neutral and eco-friendly, not wasting energy like BTC and other PoW chains. It’s exceptionally efficient, scalable, global, and sustainable. 8. EGLD has the best UX in crypto. Download the xPortal wallet—it’s like discovering Apple in Web3. The interface is simple, flawless, and you barely realize you’re using crypto. Instead of addresses, you use HeroTags. The app features all dApps, everything runs smoothly, and the visuals are beautifully designed. The explorer, web wallet, etc. follow the same high-quality user experience. 9. EGLD supports native assets, unlike Ethereum, for example. 10. EGLD is the first chain to fully implement horizontal (theoretically unlimited) sharding without compromising on decentralization—unlike Solana and others that attempt vertical scaling, leading to multiple network downtimes (11+ times) and huge hardware demands for validators, ultimately harming decentralization. 11. EGLD makes setting up a validator agency extremely easy. Even complete IT beginners can do it. The UX and documentation are superb. I personally set up the “EGLDSqueeze” agency in about 30 minutes. Managing it is straightforward via the web wallet, which feels like managing a Facebook page. This simplifies decentralization enormously. 12. EGLD allows literally anyone (even your grandma) to participate in decentralization, since nodes can run on a Raspberry Pi or a relatively affordable phone. Imagine millions of people worldwide securing the network, validating transactions without even knowing it. This can’t be done with BTC, where setting up profitable mining operations is prohibitively expensive. 13. WASM-Based Virtual Machine: You can write smart contracts in your favorite language, compile them, and run them via the fastest VM in the world. 14. EGLD has been tested at an incredible 263,000 TPS using its sharding mechanism and low hardware requirements. Allegedly, by mid-next year (April), they’ll demonstrate 1,000,000 TPS. (For context: Mastercard handles around 5,000 TPS; BTC handles 5–7 TPS.) 15. EGLD is currently the most advanced L1 in terms of scalability, security, decentralization, UX, eco-friendliness, and tokenomics. It’s the only chain that has genuinely solved the Blockchain Trilemma and is ready to onboard 1 billion people into crypto—users who won’t even realize they’re interacting with crypto. 16. EGLD is perfectly positioned for AI projects—AI agents, AI tools, or a so-called “Truth Machine” that monitors other AIs on-chain, documenting what’s true and comparing different AI outputs (some of which may be censored or biased), ensuring people don’t get confused or scammed in an AI-driven world. 17. The EGLD team is the hardest-working team I’ve ever encountered. I had the honor of meeting many of them personally, and can attest that their pace—even during a bear market—is extraordinary. 18. EGLD’s development team is exceptionally active on GitHub, continually improving their network and actively committing code. 19. EGLD plans to introduce an update reducing block time to 600ms (down from ~6 seconds), which would make the chain essentially unrivaled. 20. EGLD is effectively the only usable L1 in Europe, and the team has direct connections within the EU government—extremely bullish for the project. 21. EGLD provides top-tier on-chain governance not only for the MultiversX (EGLD) protocol but also for DeFi projects (e.g., xExchange, MEX). 22. EGLD plans to expand to the US, likely opening offices in Austin, Texas. This could put them in direct contact with Elon Musk (if it hasn’t happened already), as he’s involved with If he’s done his research, he’d discover there’s simply no better L1 worldwide. 23. EGLD solved fully implemented sharding, perfect tokenomics, and top-tier architecture with just $5M, whereas other chains failed to do so even with $100M+. The second-best sharding network, NEAR, needed $100M, has worse tokenomics, and its sharding isn’t fully implemented yet. Its UX also doesn’t compare. Owning NEAR was like comparing a VW Golf R to a Porsche GT3—EGLD is the Porsche GT3. 24. According to Similarweb, EGLD has significantly high traffic relative to other chains with market caps 100x larger. The market cap vs. web traffic discrepancy is huge, which is a strong indicator of EGLD’s potential. 25. EGLD has the most active and dedicated community relative to its user base, with users who believe in the technology, have full faith in the team, and remain loyal despite price volatility—because they use the chain and know there’s nothing better. 26. Check other chains’ active user counts on X (Twitter) and compare it with the followers of EGLD’s founders and main network accounts, versus those with 30x, 50x, or 100x larger market caps. 27. Visit the MultiversX website to observe the futuristic design and presentation, then compare it to other chains that appear nearly a decade behind in design and branding. 28. EGLD hosts the xDay Global event, showcasing updates, new builders, projects in the ecosystem, and major announcements—similar to Apple’s Keynotes—delivered in a highly professional, goosebump-inducing atmosphere. The next event is in Korea, the second-biggest crypto market after the US. Check out their previous xDay after-movie to see why this is extremely bullish. 29. EGLD is moving forward with plans for the first regulated, audited EU stablecoin under MiCa regulation, made possible by acquiring xMoney, which I view as a “Stripe” for crypto/fiat, offering everything from user solutions to merchant services—potentially the future of payments. 30. Greg Siourouni recently joined EGLD, having been an executive director at SUI Foundation. He’s now co-founder of xMoney Global. xMoney (formerly UTrust, with token UTK) is owned and founded by the MultiversX Labs team. A stablecoin might be introduced soon, which would be massively bullish given xMoney’s roadmap. They recently announced integrations with Binance Pay—both ways. 31. EGLD prioritizes user safety, believing it’s the only feasible approach once the network scales to serve a billion people—many of whom are retail users with little to no security awareness. 32. EGLD offers “Sovereign Chains,” letting you effectively clone their chain without heavy development, set up your own validators, and leverage their unlimited scalability. Any blockchain (ETH, BTC, SOL) struggling with scalability, decentralization, or security could run an ultra-fast, scalable, and secure L2 on EGLD’s Sovereign Chain, meeting top enterprise requirements. No one else has really done this. The Sovereign Chain demo achieved astonishing TPS and has an SDK. 33. No downtime since inception. 34. No shard takeover attacks have occurred. 35. Extremely fast—soon 600ms block time will be in place. 36. ESDTs – The best token standard available: fungible, non-fungible, semi-fungible, DeFi assets—everything is native and highly customizable. 37. Top-tier composability of assets and smart contracts. 38. Integrated DNS at protocol level with HeroTags (nicknames) instead of long addresses. 39. Asynchronous calls are supported. 40. Cross-shard transfers, execution, reverts, and calls are seamlessly integrated. 41. The best staking system in the space. Secure Proof of Stake (SPoS) is far more efficient than Proof of Work (PoW). 42. Built-in Delegation and Staking Provider system, with over 125K delegators. 43. Complete support for liquid staked assets, fostering decentralization rather than centralization. 44. TransferRoles for ESDT and other advanced operations. 45. Composable tasks on-chain for more sophisticated DeFi workflows. 46. MultiTransfer and asset execution within one transaction. 47. Re-entrancy protection is built-in by design. 48. Storage for ESDT assets goes beyond a linear approach, optimizing performance. 49. No integer overflows thanks to integrated safeMath operations. 50. Integrated crypto opcodes in the VM, enhancing security and performance. 51. Support for BigFloats, BigInts, and BigDecimals, enabling advanced financial calculations on-chain. 52. No sandwich attacks, plus front-running and MEV protection. 53. Relayed Transactions, simplifying user interactions and fees. 54. Smart Accounts featuring data tries and multiple built-in functions. 55. Generalized Paymaster solutions, enabling flexible fee models. 56. Subscriptions for recurring or automated on-chain payments. 57. Web2-like usability with Web3 functionality, bridging mainstream adoption. 58. StakingV4 for improved decentralization. 59. Enhanced MEV protection rolling out to safeguard users. 60. Parallel execution is coming soon, boosting throughput. 61. 1 million TPS is on the roadmap, targeted for demonstration. 62. 600ms block time is also coming soon. 63. Reduced cross-shard processing is planned to improve efficiency. 64. ZK everywhere (PI²): “prove everything” approach is coming. 65. AsyncV3 is in development for more complex cross-contract interactions. 66. Scalability enhancements for Merkle Tries or a new data model are being explored. 67. Linear storage on the VM is forthcoming. 68. A dynamic language interpreter at the VM is also planned. 69. Rumors suggest that MultiversX (EGLD) is building a “Truth Machine” on their L1—an essential, game-changing tool for AI verification and societal impact. 70. The entire team features individuals with PhDs in mathematics and physics, and many are former engineers at Google, IBM, and similar companies. 71. Over 56% of the network’s supply is staked, showcasing strong community involvement. 72. More than 6,772,347 accounts have been created on the network. 73. A total of 476,627,710 transactions have been processed on-chain without any outages or hacks. 74. EGLD has built a massive ecosystem over time. While not as numerous in project count as Solana, its market cap is ~100x smaller, yet it has far superior tokenomics and technology. The projects that do exist, like Hatom Protocol, are top-tier in UX, security, and advanced features. Hatom will soon introduce USH, a truly high-quality, decentralized stablecoin. 75. On competing chains, automated transactions aren’t easily or cheaply executed, whereas on MultiversX, tools like let you do this for free (with near-zero fees). 76. No other chain combines such a strong team and long-term vision where every product meets extreme security and UX standards like MultiversX does. This is why I see it as the “next Apple” in Web3. 77. MultiversX has a new CMO – Adam Bates, a former CMO at the Cardano Foundation. He was behind the success of Cardano’s huge marketing campaign and has a very good relationship with Charles Hoskinson. Thanks to him, Beniamin Mincu (the founder of MultiversX) was likely introduced, and now they will probably discuss how both blockchains can help each other, as well as any other potential collaborations we don’t yet know about. This is also extremely bullish. #EGLD is undeniably the most Scalable, Advanced, Secure, and User-friendly L1 supercomputer ever created. It’s built to SHAPE THE FUTURE. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 27/6/2024 - EGLDSqueeze - SUMMARY: HERE IS NO 2ND BEST. EGLD IS ONLY ONE BLOCKCHAIN THAT CAN RULE THEM ALL. ✅ UNLIMITED SCALING ✅ SCARCE AS BTC ✅ PROGRAMMABLE AS ETH ✅ NO DOWNTIME AS SOL ✅ UI/UX OF Apple ✅ SHARDING DONE BEFORE NEAR & TON ✅ BEST WALLET xPortal WITH GUARDIAN Price prediction (NFA|DYOR): My reasoning is that the real market cap as of December 23, 2024...if we take into account the value of other cryptocurrencies such as BTC, SOL, ETH, AVAX, NEAR, TON, Cardano, BNB, XRP, and so forth, plus the existence of meme coins with valuations above 20 billion USD, or even games nobody plays anymore that still have valuations above 800 million shows that EGLD’s current market cap of approximately 942 million USD is incredibly low. From a technological standpoint, user experience, and other relevant aspects, compared to SOL, NEAR, TON, AVAX, and other L1 protocols, EGLD’s market cap should realistically be around 100 billion USD. Therefore, my prediction and investment thesis is a minimum of a 100x increase from its current price (+-SOL marketcap). MultiversX is ready to onboard 1 billion people to the blockchain. From a long-term perspective, it could even reach a market cap of 1 trillion USD, which is roughly half of where BTC is right now. That would be approximately a 1060x gain from the current market cap. 1 EGLD (MultiversX) is for $34 (only 31.4M max supply) think about this. Not financial advice. Again. There is no 2nd best L1. Position yourself where the puck is going, then wait at the goal until the goal gets there Apes together, strong. Ape alone, weak. We Don't Worry. We Just Win. Shape The Future

Daniel Veroc

50,849 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

My half-a-year update of my personal 100 favorite songs Yes, this is all my opinion and I'm probably not sorry: 100. The Voidz - Pyramid of Bones 99. Bruce Springsteen - Cover Me 98. Pearl Jam - Porch (Unplugged) 97. Julian Casablancas - 11th Dimension 96. System Of A Down - Soil 95. Fleet Foxes - Helplessness Blues 94. Avenged Sevenfold - Bat Country 93. Dinosaur Jr. - Little Fury Things 92. Oasis - Don’t Look Back In Anger 91. New Order - Thieves Like Us (Instrumental) 90. Sly And The Family Stone - Stand! 89. Sabrina Carpenter - Taste 88. Prince - Little Red Corvette 87. Carissa's Wierd - You Should Be Hated Here 86. Rosa Walton & Hailey Coggins - I Really Want To Stay At Your House 85. A-ha - Take On Me 84. Billy Idol - Rebel Yell 83. Fugazi - Turnover/Repeater -in order- 82. Death Grips - Hacker 81. Lady Gaga - Abracadabra 80. Bad Religion - How Much Is Enough 79. Pearl Jam - Jeremy (Single version) 78. Phoebe Bridgers - Motion Sickness 77. Linkin Park - Lying From You 76. System of A Down - Radio/Video 75. Nirvana - Come As You Are 74. Alvvays - Belinda Says 73. My Chemical Romance - Dead! 72. Eminem ft. Rihanna - Love The Way You Lie 71. Weezer - Pork And Beans 70. Eurythmics - Here Comes The Rain Again 69. Pink Floyd - Time 68. Deftones - Change (In The House of Flies) 67. OutKast - Ms. Jackson 66. Neil Young - Heart of Gold 65. The Strokes - You Only Live Once 64. Danny Brown ft. Everybody - Really Doe 63. MGMT - Little Dark Age 62. At The Drive In - Napoleon Solo 61. Fleetwood Mac - Rhiannon 60. Magdalena Bay - She Looked Like Me! 59. The Killers - When You Were Young 58. Lady Gaga - Perfect Illusion 57. Elliott Smith - Needle In The Hay 56. The Killers - All These Things That I’ve Done 55. Portishead - Roads 54. Fall Out Boy - Headfirst Slide into Cooperstown On A Bad Bet 53. Radiohead - Black Star 52. Refused - New Noise 51. A Tribe Called Quest - We The People 50. NIN - Dead Souls 49. Tool - Sober 48. David Bowie - Starman 47. Nas - If I Ruled The World 46. Van Halen - Ain’t Talkin’ ‘Bout Love 45. The Strokes - Welcome To Japan 44. NIN - Wish 43. Fall Out Boy - Grand Theft Autumn 42. TV On The Radio - Wolf Like Me 41. Pearl Jam - Garden (Redux) 40. Bad Religion - You 39. Rage Against The Machine - Down Rodeo 38. Lady Gaga - Bad Romance 37. Metallica - Until It Sleeps 36. Pearl Jam - Rearviewmirror 35. Deftones - My Own Summer 34. Alice In Chains - Nutshell 33. New Order - True Faith 32. The Get Up Kids - Holiday 31. Queen - 39’ 30. Pearl Jam - Alive (Redux) 29. Talking Heads - Once In A Lifetime 28. The Smashing Pumpkins - Porcelina of the Vast Ocean 27. Filter - Hey Man, Nice Shot 26. Radiohead - There, There 25. Pearl Jam - Even Flow (Redux) 24. Frank Oceans - Night 23. Pearl Jam - Scared of Fear 22. The Rolling Stones - Gimme Shelter 21. Radiohead - 15 Steps 20. At The Drive In - Arcarsenal 19. Charli XCX - forever 18. Tyler The Creator - EARFQUAKE 17. The Beatles - Let It Be 16. Jawbreaker - Condition Oakland 15. Sunny Day Real Estate - In Circles 14. Radiohead - Paranoid Android 13. Boston - More Than A Feeling 12. Weezer - My Name Is Jonas 11. Neutral Milk Hotel - Holland 1945 10. Nas - N.Y. State of Mind 9. Eric Clapton - Tears In Heaven 8. Sunny Day Real Estate - Seven 7. The Strokes - Hard To Explain 6. Simon & Garfunkel - The Boxer 5. U2 - With or Without You 4. Jeff Buckley - Grace 3. Fleetwood Mac - Go Your Own Way 2. System of a Down - Chop Suey 1. Pearl Jam - Black (2004 Remix)
5:24

My half-a-year update of my personal 100 favorite songs Yes, this is all my opinion and I'm probably not sorry: 100. The Voidz - Pyramid of Bones 99. Bruce Springsteen - Cover Me 98. Pearl Jam - Porch (Unplugged) 97. Julian Casablancas - 11th Dimension 96. System Of A Down - Soil 95. Fleet Foxes - Helplessness Blues 94. Avenged Sevenfold - Bat Country 93. Dinosaur Jr. - Little Fury Things 92. Oasis - Don’t Look Back In Anger 91. New Order - Thieves Like Us (Instrumental) 90. Sly And The Family Stone - Stand! 89. Sabrina Carpenter - Taste 88. Prince - Little Red Corvette 87. Carissa's Wierd - You Should Be Hated Here 86. Rosa Walton & Hailey Coggins - I Really Want To Stay At Your House 85. A-ha - Take On Me 84. Billy Idol - Rebel Yell 83. Fugazi - Turnover/Repeater -in order- 82. Death Grips - Hacker 81. Lady Gaga - Abracadabra 80. Bad Religion - How Much Is Enough 79. Pearl Jam - Jeremy (Single version) 78. Phoebe Bridgers - Motion Sickness 77. Linkin Park - Lying From You 76. System of A Down - Radio/Video 75. Nirvana - Come As You Are 74. Alvvays - Belinda Says 73. My Chemical Romance - Dead! 72. Eminem ft. Rihanna - Love The Way You Lie 71. Weezer - Pork And Beans 70. Eurythmics - Here Comes The Rain Again 69. Pink Floyd - Time 68. Deftones - Change (In The House of Flies) 67. OutKast - Ms. Jackson 66. Neil Young - Heart of Gold 65. The Strokes - You Only Live Once 64. Danny Brown ft. Everybody - Really Doe 63. MGMT - Little Dark Age 62. At The Drive In - Napoleon Solo 61. Fleetwood Mac - Rhiannon 60. Magdalena Bay - She Looked Like Me! 59. The Killers - When You Were Young 58. Lady Gaga - Perfect Illusion 57. Elliott Smith - Needle In The Hay 56. The Killers - All These Things That I’ve Done 55. Portishead - Roads 54. Fall Out Boy - Headfirst Slide into Cooperstown On A Bad Bet 53. Radiohead - Black Star 52. Refused - New Noise 51. A Tribe Called Quest - We The People 50. NIN - Dead Souls 49. Tool - Sober 48. David Bowie - Starman 47. Nas - If I Ruled The World 46. Van Halen - Ain’t Talkin’ ‘Bout Love 45. The Strokes - Welcome To Japan 44. NIN - Wish 43. Fall Out Boy - Grand Theft Autumn 42. TV On The Radio - Wolf Like Me 41. Pearl Jam - Garden (Redux) 40. Bad Religion - You 39. Rage Against The Machine - Down Rodeo 38. Lady Gaga - Bad Romance 37. Metallica - Until It Sleeps 36. Pearl Jam - Rearviewmirror 35. Deftones - My Own Summer 34. Alice In Chains - Nutshell 33. New Order - True Faith 32. The Get Up Kids - Holiday 31. Queen - 39’ 30. Pearl Jam - Alive (Redux) 29. Talking Heads - Once In A Lifetime 28. The Smashing Pumpkins - Porcelina of the Vast Ocean 27. Filter - Hey Man, Nice Shot 26. Radiohead - There, There 25. Pearl Jam - Even Flow (Redux) 24. Frank Oceans - Night 23. Pearl Jam - Scared of Fear 22. The Rolling Stones - Gimme Shelter 21. Radiohead - 15 Steps 20. At The Drive In - Arcarsenal 19. Charli XCX - forever 18. Tyler The Creator - EARFQUAKE 17. The Beatles - Let It Be 16. Jawbreaker - Condition Oakland 15. Sunny Day Real Estate - In Circles 14. Radiohead - Paranoid Android 13. Boston - More Than A Feeling 12. Weezer - My Name Is Jonas 11. Neutral Milk Hotel - Holland 1945 10. Nas - N.Y. State of Mind 9. Eric Clapton - Tears In Heaven 8. Sunny Day Real Estate - Seven 7. The Strokes - Hard To Explain 6. Simon & Garfunkel - The Boxer 5. U2 - With or Without You 4. Jeff Buckley - Grace 3. Fleetwood Mac - Go Your Own Way 2. System of a Down - Chop Suey 1. Pearl Jam - Black (2004 Remix)

Machine Gun Philly

15,997 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce