Joe Rogan #2152 with Terrence Howard
I started this post about a month ago, about 8 days after the conversation discussed below, between Joe Rogan and Terrence Howard, was recorded.
I was slow to watch the Joe Rogan Experience conversation with Terrence Howard, but I’m glad I did, and highly recommend it. Almost 8 million views in 8 days. Not bad for a 3 hour chat on mindful subject matter. (At this moment a month later, over 10 million.)
It’s amazing to think that spending 3-hours to reveal and discuss the underpinnings and physics of creation in logical terms, and show some of the potential benefits of a new way of thinking, would be considered long. To me it’s both a beginning and overdue! There are many more aspects that call for, and merit exploration.
Alas, that hasn’t been the case.
Conversations about the timeliness or value of this discussion have not been forthcoming as attention has been directed at Howard’s audacity to have a different interpretation of “science”, along with a mathematical concept (“1 x 1 = 2”) for which he can give logical support.
The discussion went far beyond 1 x 1 = 2. They talked problems and “off narrative” solutions that most critics of his math are silent to. He cited the work of previous luminaries, including Nikola Tesla and Walter Russell, whose impact on today’s society, born of their innovative thoughts that few could fathom, remains grossly under-appreciated to this day.
Howard was clearly engaged and involved with his subject matter, as evidenced and supported by corroborating computer models and working prototypes.
He brought innovations that were products of, and derived from this “new” body of knowledge.
To save a little time, here is a 6 minute example of the innovation, a propulsion system called Lynchpin that Howard both articulates and demonstrates.
Truly Overdue
“New” isn’t the best way to describe the information-base that Howard was drawing from; true would be more appropriate. Since our society has standardized on many concepts and theories that are grossly incorrect, Germ Theory being just one, the basis for Howard’s theories could be considered “truer” than what we’re accustomed to thinking to be “true”.
His reasoning for using Lynchpin to clear up space debris is appropriate, timely and brilliant. Who else is even suggesting this? Even though there is a push to further invade (i.e. exploit) space, I’m sure the upcoming one-dimensional “presidential debates” won’t touch on this subject.
Also appropriate and correct are Howard’s cautions concerning sending people to asteroids or colonizing Mars for various mining expeditions (exploitation again). Pressure issues similar to those associated with ocean diving apply, but are not factored into present space exploration scenarios. If they have been, or if his assertions were incorrect, someone who knows should be addressing the idea, not trying to marginalize the questioner, especially one with a workable resolution.
Official scenario-writers don’t want these matters factored in because logical solutions allow the public to support intelligent and effective options.
Virtually ALL alternative viewpoints concerning the purported “pandemic” from 2020 to 2023 were stifled, “fact checked” (meaning real facts were “checked” at the door). “The solution” was readied in record time while hundreds of millions of people were incentivized, financially or by other means of coercion, to play along with the game. Never mind that the game was rigged against the best interests of the vast majority of erstwhile “players”. Or were they “marks”?
And then there’s this!
The purpose of this video is denounce or disprove, even without examination, the man with virtually no consideration to, or interest in what he presented.
I suspect that the host was instructed or hied to produce this hit piece. His heart was clearly missing.
Why, Why Files?
Several weeks after the actual interview, Andrew Gentile, host of popular podcast, The Why Files (3.5 million subscribers), whose episode views routinely number into the millions within days, weighed in. This is on his Backstage channel.
He didn’t want to “make waves” with his audience base, but followed the usual routine of inferring that there is much to “debunk”, as opposed to interactively consider and learn.
Learning begins with the understanding that we don’t know it all. So we open our minds and share our perspectives.
Interactive questioning involves an interchange between people. Unilateral questioning isn’t questioning at all. It’s dismissal of interaction, as well as the one with the unconventional view by the one with the conventional (familiar) view.
Ripples through Social Media
This question was posed by a thoughtful Facebook poster; not to me specifically, but I wrote the following reply (with a few additions here and there):
I watched the JRE conversation with TH, and was impressed with his grasp of information. Yet being familiar with many (of the concepts that he presented), there were places that warranted further clarification, if not correction.
Howard did not “invent” the scaled periodic table. Walter Russell introduced it after an extended experience in what would be called, a “non-dual”, which some would call enlightened, state of consciousness. At the time, the periodic table consisted of 85 elements. Russell’s had 122, which TH alluded to. Russell explained that hydrogen wasn’t the “first” element, but the first that is detectable on this plane of perception.
Russell explained the physics and dynamics of motion behind each of the *observations* that were eventually described and illustrated in his first book, The Universal One (1926), and the follow-on title, The Secret of Light (1947).
The only “value” that “modern science” gleaned from Russell’s periodic table was deuterium and plutonium, which have facilitated as much atomic and nuclear destruction as any benefit.
Everything that is, is of everything else that is. Nothing is of itself alone. All created things are indissolubly united. — Walter Russell, The Universal One
In A New Concept of the Universe (1957) Russell intimated that humanity likewise had a grand opportunity to convert our energy production and usage conventions from the present “explosive” and “hot” model to one based on hydrogen, which is “implosive”, “cool” and radically abundant.
It was Russell who stated that all comes from, and is made up of *one* thing. And in his extensive explanations and diagrams of motion-physics, both of the generative and the radiative kind, he asserted that there are no “straight” lines (motion vectors), and that at the center of ALL perceivable things, is a quality referred as stillness which anything that is in motion moves around.
Matter is light. God and matter are One. Spirit and matter are the same substance. That substance is light. There are not two substances in the universe. There cannot be two substances in the universe.
Synonymously, and with no religious bias, inference or obligation, Russell referred to the Stillness, which made ALL “objects” possible, as God.
I watched a couple of the video critiques of Terrence Howard, including Hossendelder’s. Personally, I did not see, and therefore did not embrace the logic of his “1x1=2” proposition.
I love what Howard has done with his knowledge. He has imagined better ways to do things, and he has articulated some avoidable consequences to present methods and initiative, such as space colonies on Mars and a workable way to clean up space debris. If we can clean up space debris, we can also remediate other aspects of our environment, non-destructively.
These subjects were consistently missing from the few analysts that I saw, who were dead set on discrediting Howard personally and indirectly, his ideas.
No one is a finished product, and no one “knows it all”.
Terrance Howard laid bare some prime points of exploration and discovery for humanity. But taking that next step would require each to acknowledge of some fundamental misconceptions about the creative process of this realm, and our very important place within it. This is a profoundly personal, inward journey.
We are presently carrying out a myriad of assumptions and practices that are not supported by common sense, passed on from generations past. Questioning was not an option, and monetization became the acceptable, then desired reward. It is a specious one.
Common sense and “science” are *not* two different things. It is unwise to expect any one person to have answers to all questions.
Each of us is here to ask questions, find answers, and expand truth within our own consciousness. Terrence Howard is clearly doing that. What he doesn’t know, or have correct, will come *to him*, as it comes to each who, in their own context of consciousness does the same thing.
Not ‘Far’ Enough
I loved what was discussed in this conversation, so much so that I recorded a copy. Listening to the replay, some concepts “sunk in” deeper. However, there remains additional awarenesses that are of equal, if not greater importance.
No one can venture beyond the places of mind that they habituate. Nor can one change his habits of thinking until sufficient reason becomes self-apparent.
I can’t speakto, or support Howard’s math propositions, or circular periodic table, where he divides hertzian frequencies by 2. I would have sought an audit trail to see whether these new conventions were involved in the Lynchpin innovation, and if so, then how.
Lynchpin is an answer to a problem that is being ignored, and the rush to attack the credibility of the man has left no room for rational discussion about a relevant point that he brought up, and offered a solution.
I don’t know Terrence Howard’s mind. No one knows it, or the principles that he presented, well enough to declare him or his ideas “insane”. On the other hand, some of our most fundamental beliefs about “the physics of existence” could stand some revision and updating, that were not evident in the Howard interview, but also active in his critics too. I’ll leave it at that.
I’ve taken long enough birthing this this elephantine post.
You’ll see what I mean as this journey continues.