Palantir & Pre-Crime

alternative news
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
August 18, 2017

Never heard of Palantir? Well, if you’re a J.R.R. Tolkien- Lord of the Rings fan, or a fan of the movie adaptations of the fantasy trilogy, you’ll know what a “palantir” is: it is for all intents and purposes a crystal-ball that functions as a kind of communications device, allowing its users, presumably, to also see future actions.

It is also the name of a predictive program developed by Peter Thiel, and rapidly being sold to law enforcement agencies around the country, according to this article shared by Mr. R.R.T, and it’s well worth reading and pondering carefully:

Palantir: the ‘special ops’ tech giant that wields as much real-world power as Google

As the article avers, the program brings to mind Philip K. Dick’s “Department of Pre-Crime” which figured in the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report:

Palantir, the CIA-backed startup, is Minority Report come true. It is all-powerful, yet no one knows it even exists. Palantir does not have an office, it has a “SCIF” on a back street in Palo Alto, California. SCIF stands for “sensitive compartmentalised information facility”. Palantir says its building “must be built to be resistant to attempts to access the information within. The network must be ‘airgapped’ from the public internet to prevent information leakage.”

Palantir’s defence systems include advanced biometrics and walls impenetrable to radio waves, phone signal or internet. Its data storage is blockchained: it cannot be accessed by merely sophisticated hacking, it requires digital pass codes held by dozens of independent parties, whose identities are themselves protected by blockchain.

Palantir watches everything you do and predicts what you will do next in order to stop it. As of 2013, its client list included the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Centre for Disease Control, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, Special Operations Command, West Point and the IRS. Up to 50% of its business is with the public sector. In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture arm, was an early investor.

Palantir tracks everyone from potential terrorist suspects to corporate fraudsters (Bernie Madoff was imprisoned with the help of Palantir), child traffickers and what they refer to as “subversives”. But it is all done using prediction.

In Iraq, the Pentagon used Palantir software to track patterns in roadside bomb deployment and worked out garage-door openers were being used as remote detonators by predicting it.

Palantir allowed the marines to upload DNA samples from remote locations and tap into information gathered from years of collecting fingerprints and DNA evidence, the results returned almost immediately.

Of course, all of this calls to mind Dick’s “Department of Pre-Crime” and the dangers it presents, and the article itself mentions them:

However, when Cruise’s character begins to question the morality of what he is doing, his superiors detect a threat to the entire pre-crime programme. In order to get rid of him, Cruise is framed for a murder by altering the data of his thought history. In the final showdown with his boss, it is explained to Cruise that sometimes the numbers need to lie for the greater good of society.

Minority Report is set in 2054, but Palantir is putting pre-crime into operation now. The Los Angeles Police Department has used Palantir to predict who will commit a crime by swooping Minority Report-style on suspects. Palantir calls its work with the LAPD “improving situational awareness, and responding to crime in real time”.

Ok, so where’s the high octane speculation.

Well, today I don’t have one, but I do have a high octane prediction. Christ, according to the Gospels, once warned that all evil ultimately proceeds from the heart and mind of man. This is where it begins; the evil action begins not just in a thought or a temptation, but by the individual will holding it, so to speak, to the mind’s attention, and contemplating it. From God’s point of view, in other words, while the wilful attention to an evil action may not result in the action itself, nonetheless it is the same in God’s eyes as if it had. But from the practical development of moral theology, it was long recognized that, from the human point of view, the action itself was far worse than the mere act of wilful (and pleasurable) attention to it. (Apologies for compacting so much into so little space!) With this in mind, here is the high octane prediction: the use of such programs will be justified by those wanting to impose even more surveillance on society precisely by such “theological” and “moral” appeals; after all, if Christ warned about the heart and mind of the individual as the beginning of the process of an evil action, then the best way to nip it in the bud is to convict on the basis of that beginning, regardless of the end result. It will be “sold”, as it were, as a very “Christian” or “pious” or “religious” thing to do. Technology will thus be sold as a “solution” to the old problem of theodicy; technology, not grace, will perfect mankind. Everyone must conform in their thinking… it will be the new manifestation of the “social gospel”, a tempting apple in the eye of its advocates.

And that of course, completely misses the other part of the problem, but I’ll leave that for the reader to think about…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

And Another Thing: Chase Was Hit Before July 4th Too…


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 14, 2017

Yesterday, I blogged about the silver “flash crash” of July 7, and earlier this week, about the NASDAQ flash crash, but, just in case you might have thought these were nothing but accidental “glitches” from the “coincidence” side of the glitch family, rather from the esteemed branch of the family of deliberately planned glitches, it looks as if things might be leaning definitely to the “deliberate action” side of the equation, according to this article shared, once again, by Mr. G.B.:

Nationwide outage hits Chase bank customers before 4th of July

Chase’s system went down coast to coast, but what’s very intriguing here is the suggestion that Chase might have been dealing with its own glitches, which it was calling “improvements”:

A message on the Chase website explained to customers that the outages were due to the bank “making a few improvements”according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

The bank said customers would not be able to access their information or schedule bill payments or transfers.

However, customers reported that entire branches had been shut down Monday, while others complained they were unable to pay their rent and bills, withdraw money from ATM’s, or even access their information over the phone or in person.

Now, as you might have guessed, I have all sorts of wild and crazy high octane speculations running through my head reading this, not the least of which is the thought that “two is coincidence, three is a conspiracy.” On my view that these types of events are the results of some systematic probing of financial cyber-architecture vulnerabilities, then targeting the NASDAQ, a commodities market, and Chase Manhattan, a large international bank, makes a lot of sense.

But that’s not the only thing running through my head, so let’s speculate on the very end of the twig, where the weight of speculation far exceeds the amount of evidence to prop it up.

Let’s posit a hypothetical bank, say, Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool, and let’s say that, just before the beginning of August, when the entire country of France goes on vacation holiday, Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool announces in the Toulouse Daily Whistle, that it is going to shut down its systems to make improvements just before the next holiday, stranding thousands of Frenchmen at their ATMs and keeping Paris unusually populated for the month of August. That’s quite an improvement, for during this period of being “down,” one might – just as a kind of hypothetical high octane speculation – be able to access the funds that its depositors could not access, and via a variety of cutouts, fronts, and so on, be able to place gobs of trades, make huge amounts of money, keep it all off the books (remember, the system is down – just before the holidays – to make “improvements”), trigger various flash crashes in various markets, and perhaps even target specific equities to be re-evaluated because of the reset when the circuit breakers kick in and halt all the trading.

But of course, nothing like that could ever happen, because we all know that big international mega-banks like Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool are cleaner than a Wall Street toilet.

And thank goodness too, because I was beginning to lose my faith in crony finance crapitalism.

See you on the slip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Hobby Lobby Fined For Importing Stolen Artifacts

archaeology
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 9, 2017

This week has been such an unusually fruitful week for articles being shared that, today, Saturday, I am still combing through them to decide on what to schedule for blogs this coming week! So I want to thank everyone once again for sharing so many good finds, making the choice of what to blog about more difficult and, in a way, more fun. Some of these articles I have in fact archived for next week, as I may yet blog about them.

But this story had to be at the top of the list. Indeed, when I saw it, there was no doubt in my mind that it was at the top of the “final cuts” folder. So many people found various versions of it that I knew there was something in the aether and that this story would require some attention. So I present some of those various versions that people found for your consideration, before I get to my high octane speculation about the story, with a thank you to all of you who shared these articles and who are following the story:

Hobby Lobby to pay $3 million fine, forfeit smuggled ancient artifacts

Hobby Lobby will pay $3 million, forfeit ancient items smuggled from Iraq

Justice Department sues Hobby Lobby over thousands of looted Iraqi artifacts it bought

Let’s begin with the last of these articles, which indicates that Israel and the United Arab Emirates were involved in the deal. What is unclear, of course, is whether the individuals and organizations that functioned as components of the deal were simply located in these countries, or whether they were actually members of their governments. For reasons I’ll get to in the high octane speculation, I suspect the latter.

Turning to the second article, we see a picture of a cuneiform tablet from the New York Times, with the caption “Pictured is a cuneiform tablet, one of several artifacts smuggled from Iraq by owners of Hobby Lobby.” Then we read:

Prosecutors said in the complaint that Hobby Lobby, whose evangelical Christian owners have long maintained an interest in the biblical Middle East, began in 2009 to assemble a collection of cultural artifacts from the Fertile Crescent. The company went so far as to send its president and an antiquities consultant to the United Arab Emirates to inspect a large number of rare cuneiform tablets — traditional clay slabs with wedge-shaped writing that originated in Mesopotamia thousands of years ago.

In 2010, as a deal for the tablets was being struck, an expert on cultural property law who had been hired by Hobby Lobby warned company executives that the artifacts might have been looted from historical sites in Iraq and that a failing to determine their heritage could break the law.

Despite these words of caution, the prosecutors said, Hobby Lobby bought more than 5,500 artifacts — the tablets and clay talismans and so-called cylinder seals — from an unnamed dealer for $1.6 million in December 2010.

Now, this really captured my attention, not for what it is saying, but rather, for what it seems to be carefully avoiding saying, namely, that these cuneiform tablets and cylinder seals might be some of the missing loot from the Baghdad Museum Looting, about which I have written in my books and blogged about. I have always been suspicious of the whole events for several reasons, and it’s worth recalling those reasons: (1) People dressed in American uniforms were seen by others going into the museum and removing things. Whether they were actually American soldiers or merely people dressed in American uniforms is a moot point. I have suspected the latter, and that the looting was a false flag, because (2) the story of the looting and people dressed in American uniforms was broken – as far as I am aware – by Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine, a point which puts a rather funny light on the whole event, for as I have pointed out numerous times, the French and Germans had several archaeological teams in Iraq at the behest of Saddam Hussein’s government, digging up the Iraqi desert. These teams would have kept field catalogues of their discoveries, including brief notes about the contents of any cuneiform tablets they unearthed. Of course, when the US and UK and its “allies” went into Iraq during operation Desert Storm, the French and Germans were advised to remove their archaeological teams. The unwritten part of this story is that the German intelligence, the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst) maintained a presence in the country, and hence, in my speculations previously advanced, would have been capable of mounting a looting of the Museum with personnel in American uniforms. (3) When the Museum looting was studied, experts came to the conclusion that it was an “inside job” since the looters apparently were interested in specific things and knew exactly where to go to get them, in spite of the fact that many items had not, apparently, been entered into the Museum catalogue.

(4) Then came the U.S.-led recovery operation led by Marine Colonel Bagdonovich, which, in terms of the art works recovered, was quite successful. But as I mentioned at the time, something disturbed me, and this was the fact that the missing cuneiform tablets had seemed to drop completely out of the story, while the world’s newspapers concentrated on supplying us with pictures of dazzling and beautiful ancient Mesopotamian art works that had been recovered. Faced with golden crowns and jewelry, thousands of dusty brown clay tablets really weren’t very sensational, and I suspected then, and still do now, that that was the whole point: the really important loot was the tablets, not the art works.

The tablets, in other words, had dropped right off the radar, until a few years later, several thousands apparently turned up in Spain, causing a rumpus between Madrid and Baghdad, because Madrid did not want to return them. I say apparently turned up in Spain, because, like so often in these stories, we are never presented with the chain of evidence concerning these tablets to document the claim that they were, indeed, recently looted.  And so it is here: we’re supposed to believe that Hobby Lobby was the final step in a chain of custody from Iraq, to Israel and the Emirates, to the USA. But in order to establish this, it would seem to me that one would have to have an itemized inventory of what was on the tablets, or a photo record of each one, and then establish that the specific tablets in question were in the possession of each of the alleged participants.   So the question remains open: were these tablets part of the original Baghdad Museum Looting haul (or any associated looting activity at that time?) and what is on said tablets that would make Hobby Lobby want to buy them (and then, sell some of them)?

All this brings me to my high octane speculation of the day, for in the first article we read that this may not have been a “simple mistake” on Hobby Lobby’s part:

Ancient cuneiform tablets and clay bullae from modern-day Iraq were smuggled into the United States through the United Arab Emirates and Israel, JOD officials said. With Hobby Lobby’s consent they were falsely labeled as “ceramics” and “samples” and illegally shipped to Hobby Lobby stores and two corporate offices, according to the DOJ.

Cuneiform is an ancient system of writing on clay tablets that was used in Mesopotamia, according to the DOJ, and clay bullae are balls of clay on which seals have been imprinted.

“In 2009, Hobby Lobby began acquiring a variety of historical Bibles and other artifacts. Developing a collection of historically and religiously important books and artifacts about the Bible is consistent with the company’s mission and passion for the Bible,” said a Hobby Lobby statement. (Emphasis added)

We are told that the haul was not simply cuneiform tablets, but cylinder seals and so on, and that all this interest was because of Hobby Lobby’s interest in the bible. Cylinder seals were used in Mesopotamia as a way of sealing documents; they would be equivalent to today’s corporate seals, or monarchial or hierarchical seals of a king, nobleman, or bishop, and thus they are rather important from a legal point of view. They could, potentially, be seals that once belonged to Mesopotamian dynasties (and I’ll let the reader run wild with speculation on that possibility… I don’t think I need to say any more). What interests me rather is the allegation that these items were intentionally mislabeled, and therefore that the intention was to smuggle them into this country. That implies, to my speculative mind, a further intention to possibly remove more “intriguing” or perhaps even “offending” tablets from public view and scrutiny, while benefiting a narrow circle of insiders studying the contents of these objects. And what better way to do it than through corporate cutouts. I’ve even entertained the notion that the real reason Saddam Hussein was hung was that he may already have been briefed on the possible “sensational contents” of some of the things being dug up in his country’s deserts, and that he simply had to be permanently silenced. After all, it was he who invited those archaeological teams to Iraq in the first place.

And, as always, we’re still waiting for these media to report on the contents of these tablets, or at least, direct us to links where we may view each and every one, and to sites where – if any translations have been made – we can read what’s on them. I suspect if that were to happen, we’d be reading a lot of ordinary business transactions, a bit like reading someone’s checkbook register. The “juicy” stuff has probably been carefully removed from public view… and perhaps found its way into a corporate vault somewhere between Baghdad and here.

The sad bottom line is, that the looting of antiquities from Iraq is a story that just keeps on giving.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

USS Fitzgerald The Victim Of An Electromagnetic Warfare Attack

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 7, 2017

If you’ve been following the developing theories about the USS Fitzgerald ramming in Japan, you’ll be interested in this article shared by Mr. D.F.(copy and paste into your browser:

Stealth Attack On USS Fitzgerald Proves US Navy No Longer Controls Seven Seas

The article reiterates many of the points I argued in my own previous comments on this incident, namely, that I find it difficult to rationalize a collision with a US Navy frigate due to simple incompetence for a variety of reasons. Ships just don’t “sneak up” on other ships. Collisions of ships do happen, of course, on occasion. And the results can be tragic (think only of the Andrea Doria). But in the main, a ship venturing into the “danger” zone of any nation’s warships would be hailed, warned off, quarters sounded, and evasive action taken.

But as far as I am able to tell, none of this apparently happened with the Fitzgerald, if the various internet reports, such as the above, are to be believed.

Assuming that they are, the report argues more or less as I did previously, that in the absence of clear explanations, we must assume that the steerage and other operational and communications systems of the vessel were not operational, for whatever reason. Why, for example, was the captain still apparently asleep? Under circumstances of a potential collision or threat to the ship, again, evasive action would have been ordered and the captain woken up and notified. This implies that it was not possible to move the ship nor wake the captain through the internal communication system.

But toward the end of this strange article – and again, I am not familiar with this website, nor its reliability. I am presenting it for your consideration, as I know many readers here are following this story – we have the following:

The first time the container ship approached the USS Fitzgerald, the Fitz was still fully functional.

An airplane or drone flying overhead was responsible for the energy pulse that killed all electricity on the warship. (the whole event took place in the wee hours of the morning from 1:30 to 2:20 AM)

The container ship was required to turn back toward the Fitzgerald to do its job as commanded by whoever EMPulsed the ship.

In turning back to do the “job” the container ship did not have great positioning to destroy the vessel and so ended up only disabling rather than sinking the thing.

Thus, the CIA-planned story (aka false flag attack) could not be used as many on board the Fitzgerald saw what really happened, and survived.

The CIA plot was probably an attack by Russia or China or NK.  A contingency plan was then quickly implemented; one that they could feed to those present as a legitimate story.

The bottom line here is that this attack was quite likely a false flag operation in the tradition of the USS Maine (“Remember the Maine!”), the RMS Lusitania (World War I false flag), and the USS Maddox (aka the Gulf of Tonkin incident).

Conclusion

Either someone wants war.  Or, someone else seeks to prevent war.

While this attack on the USS Fitzgerald appears to be a typical CIA-coordinated false flag attack designed to start a war, it appears to have been a real attack perpetrated to prevent one.

In other words, it was a conspiracy within a conspiracy, and/or a false flag within a false flag. Yes, it’s really that complicated.  As it frequently when one camp is trying to start a war as aggressively as the other side is working to avert one.

To my knowledge, no one from government, or corporate controlled media, has yet even stated that this was an attack: the “attack” hypothesis seems to be largely concentrated – at present – in the free and independent media.

The scenario is, however, worth noting, because as the article itself avers, the incident could be seen as a part of a wider pattern of such electromagnetic interference with US forces, beginning with the now infamous Donald Cook incident, to the alleged Russian defeat of NATO communications systems in Syria shortly after that nation’s intervention there, to a repeat of the Donald Cook incident, involving the Donald Cook once again, this time, in the Baltic Sea with yet another Russian Sukhoi-22 fighter-bomber. While I have not seen corroboration of the allegation that there was an airplane overhead during the incident, there would not need to be, if indeed this was an electromagnetic attack, which for the reasons outlined above I believe it to be. Such an attack could have come from the container ship itself or other nearby vessels, and perhaps even from the shore.

For my two cents’ worth of high octane speculation, however, I have difficulty believing this was a CIA plot that was also, as the article states “an attack by Russia or China or (North Korea).” This would imply the CIA is in cahoots with those nations in an overly complicated plot to start a war. While I don’t put anything past the departments and agencies of the federal swamp and believe they’re pretty much capable of anything in spite of the many good people in government, I just find that one a bit too much to swallow.

What I don’t have difficult swallowing, however, is the possibility that those nations may have learned of a plot, or course of action. After all, the US Navy has recently deployed three carrier battle groups to that region, which is an enormous concentration of naval power usually presaging some sort of American action.

Then…

… the electronics system, and maybe even the steerage system, of an expensive frigate fails…

completely.

And that translates into the message that the article begins with: “your navy may not be in as solid control of the sea lanes as you think it is.” And that means the same might go for (1) aircraft, and more importantly (2) space-based assets, if a similar electromagnetic platform exists in space, or on the ground capable of reaching space. And that means in turn, those “smart bombs” may not work too well, and it may be rather difficult moving troops and supplies to deal with “threats.”

Of course, for years, there have been rumors that the Russians have very advanced electronic warfare systems, rumors which the Russians from time to time have “stoked.” Shortly after the first incident with the Donald Cook, Russian television aired a one hour review of some of those systems – no doubt for the deliberate attention of analysts in the Pentagram – and the effect of that broadcast was that it gave the impression that this electronic warfare interference with missile systems would make them behave like wildly misfiring bottle rockets, going off crazily in all directions… everywhere, but on target.

It’s a very Russian sort of approach to such things. The American anti-missile system is, we’ve been told, one of the approach of hitting a bullet with a bullet. The Russian anti-missile system approach is simple to interfere with the flight path by whatever means, including scrambling the electronics and turning expensive American rockets into crazy bottlerockets.

In any case, messages are being sent, and it’s interesting to note that, for a brief moment, things quieted down after the Fitzgerald incident.

See you on the flip side…
Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Inhuman Markets: Even The Algorithm Creators Don’t Know What…


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 27, 2017

Over the years I’ve become increasingly wary of the various markets that are now run almost exclusively by computers and have occasionally commented about it in blogs. I’ve even entertained the possibility, in my high octane speculation mode, that various “flash crash” events seem to have features that suggest that the algorithm “took over” and drove a market event with no connection to human market realities; in this respect, I continue to be unconvinced, for example, by the various explanations of the May 2010 flash crash; call it a suspicion, or a hunch, nothing more. Yes, in short, I’ve entertained the idea that artificial intelligence (AI) is not “coming” but already “here”, and may be infesting the “dark pools” and high frequency trading (HFT) algorithms.

Well, now I’m not the only one, according to these stories shared by Ms. K.M.:

Like Something Out of ‘The Twilight Zone,’ This Market Is About the Machines

Doug Kass: Not Even The Algo Creators Know What Is Going On

From the first article, I want to draw your attention to the following statements:

Listen Luddites, for the stock market, too, it’s a thing about the machines.

Throw away your fundamental analysis, your price charts, interest rates and economic growth forecasts, as the market has lost its moorings.

It is no longer a pyramid of fundamental and technical analysis nor is it a response to changing investor sentiment.

The ongoing multiyear changes in the market structure and dominant investor strategies in which quants, algos and other passive strategies (e.g., ETFs) have replaced active managers raise the same risks that Finchley faced 57 years ago.

And the overwhelming impact of central bankers’ largesse is the cherry on the market’s non-fundamentally influenced sundae.

As I have written:

“The combination of central bankers’ unprecedented largesse (and liquidity) when combined with mindless quant strategies and the enormous popularity of ETFs will, as night follows day, become a toxic cocktail for the equity markets. While we live in an imperfect world, we face (with valuations at a 95% decile on a number of metrics) a stock market that views the world almost perfectly.”

Back to JPMorgan’s Marko Kalonovic, who is quoted at the top of this piece and again here:

“… some striking facts: to understand this market transformation, note that Passive and Quantitative investors now account for ~60% of equity assets (vs. less than 30% a decade ago). We estimate that only ~10% of trading volumes originates from fundamental discretionary traders. This means that while fundamental narratives explaining the price action abound, the majority of equity investors today don’t buy or sell stocks based on stock-specific fundamentals. (Bold emphasis added)

Let that last statement sink in for a moment, for if you, like I, have been wondering just why the heck markets don’t make sense any more, it’s because they are utterly unconnected to humanity and human decision-making. That “less than ten percent” of trading volume that “originates from fundamental discretionary traders” means that actual human consideration of stock performance, or even equities in a certain specific sector of industry – say, film-making or farm implement manufacture – are based on actual human consideration of the performance, risk, and returns of a particular stock.

I don’t know about you, but I find this development more than disturbing.

But before we move on to the second article, pause and consider something else: it is often a criticism or critique that centralized solutions, the “one size fits all” political solutions of the political left are unworkable, precisely because no human being can calculate for all possible circumstances for all human beings: one cannot, as it were, create a bureaucratic policy or algorithm to stick in “guideline notebooks” for every possible situation.

And that raises the thorny philosophical question that no one seems to want to address:

How then, can we expect human creators of computer algorithms to do for markets, what cannot be done for other segments of human interaction by bureaucrats?

With that philosophical point in mind, turn to the second article, and consider these very cogent points made for our friends at Zero Hedge:

Most people think of artificial intelligence and algos as simply executing logical rules programmed into them by humans — the same rules that the programming humans would follow if they were presented with the same data and data analysis. The algos and AIs are doing it in the same way humans have always done and would do, but at a much slower speed or perhaps not at all because of the very weak and distant relationship of some data items to other data items.

The general belief is that algos and AIs are just “faster humans able to do a lot more calculations in a meaningful time frame”. That may NOT be a correct characterization of some of the more powerful AIs that may be working in the markets. Of course, we don’t know what AIs are working because there are no regulations requiring that machine decision-making accounts disclose and register as such … a very, very big gap in regulation.

True, AI and the related “machine learning” developments at the leading edge of such technology do NOT simply duplicate human rules and logic. Instead, while they may perform simple repetitive correlations initially on data as humans currently formulate that data, the more advanced machines go on to program themselves at successive layers, where the data being analyzed and correlated is no longer what we think of as data. Rather, it is often data artifacts created by the first layers in a form that no human would ever consider or has ever seen. To put in a more street-level way, the first level creates ghosts and apparitions and shadows that the second layer treats as real data on which it assesses correlation and predictability in the service of some decision asked of it. AND … a third and fourth and on and on are doing the same thing with output from each layer below it.

The result of this procedure is striking and terrifying when the the leading experts in AI and machine learning are interviewed. They admit that they have no way of determining what rules AI and machine- learning powered machines are following in making their decisions AND we cannot even know what inputs are being used in making those decisions.

Think about that. The creators have no knowledge of what their creations are thinking or what kind of inputs the machines are thinking about and how decisions about that are being made. The machines are inscrutable and, most terrifyingly important, UNPREDICTABLE.

We are not telling these AIs how to make decisions. The machines are figuring out how to decide to “make a profit” on their own and subject to no enforceable constraint.

The resulting risk of “flash crashes” — to lump all sudden and unexpected behaviors into a catchphrase — is unknowable but probably much greater than anyone even dreams. The machines have no fear of flash crashes or any other kind of crash. Such crashes might even serve their purpose of “making a profit.”

Note what is really being said:

 (1) algorithmic trading generates artifacts in data that no human ever would;

(2) is processing and making trading decisions based on those artifacts;

(3) none of these processes are transparent, and thus, we do not even know why the markets are behaving as they are behaving, we only know they are not reflective of human market realities; and finally,

(4) all this can lead to the risk of flash crashes.

Lest one think that this sounds too incredible to be true, consider the final closing paragraph of this article, which is the biggest jaw-dropper of them all:

Everyone should read this important note from JPMorgan’s head quant (hat tip to Zero Hedge) in order to understand how risk parity, volatility trending, stat arb and other quant strategies that are agnostic to balance sheets, income statements and private market value artificially are impacting the capital markets and, temporarily at least, are checking volatility. (Bold and italics emphasis added)

Let that sink in for a moment: because algorithms trade at such extraordinary speed, and execute trades in blocks of equities, little or no correlation is being with actual specific equity performance, such as a human “discretionary investor” would make, looking at “old fashioned analogue sorts of things” like balance sheets, income, profit/loss statements, company indebtedness, cost-earnings ratios, exposure, assets &c… in other words, the algorithms have little to no connection to markets and their realities, much less to human decision-making processes that are normally involved in the investment process.

The bottom line? Well, over the long term, obvious a huge rethink of computer-based trading is in order. Frankly, I’m old fashioned enough to want to see a Wall Street trading floor of shouting traders, piles of paper, and bundles of stock certificates being mailed out every day. But beyond this, there’s a short term necessity, perhaps one can call it a strategy, and that’s “keep it local”, and in “keeping it local” I mean, even for local investments, finding out about their exposure to national and international markets: how much of that local bank’s stock is traded on the big markets, and who are the major shareholders? And so on… because, for right now, these machines are at the root of market unreality.

This should, and I hope will, prompt a discussion, and it will have to be a deep one, for the problem of the quants and their algorithms is highlighting the limitations of technology for a human world. The disconnection of markets from real human market activity is a case in point of how technologies have been adapted to a normal human activity – investing and trading – in an inhuman way. And the problem is, if the markets are that far removed from human realities, what will happen if, suddenly, someone pulls the plug? How many would remember how to conduct trades on the floor, the “old fashioned way”?

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

I.G. Farbensanto At It Again: Seed Exchanges In Africa Under Pressure

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 16, 2017

It appears that big “agribusiness” – which we less-than-lovingly refer to here on this website as I.G. Farbensanto – is at it once again, using its usual bag of dirty tricks to attempt to outlaw normal seed exchanges in Africa (whew! is that the distinct whiff of imperialism and even racism that I smell here? Sure smells like it). At least, it is if the following article shared by Mr. V.T. is true:

Monsanto and Big Ag Colonizing Africa, Criminalizing Traditional Seed Exchanges

Just in case you missed how utterly draconian their policies are, and how utterly immoral and out of touch with humanity they are, consider these opening paragraphs of the article, noting in particular the use of GMOs as part of John Perkins’ “economic hit man” strategy:

Of the many concerns surrounding the dominance of agrichemicals companies and GMO foods, the most frightening dimension is that corporate manufactured seed is wiping out global biodiversity in food crops and creating a punitive legal framework for our total dependence on these companies for food.

Monsanto, Syngenta and other majors in agribusiness are presently colonizing Africa with the help of international aid programs which force nations into agreements requiring dependence on patented seeds, thereby prohibiting traditional seed exchanges.

Reporting on the situation in Tanzania, Ebe Daems of Mondiaal Nieuws informs us of recent legislation which puts local farmers under the threat of heavy fines of up to €205,300 and even prison terms of up to 12 years for violating the intellectual property rights of agrichemicals companies if individuals sell or trade in non-patented seed.

“If you buy seeds from Syngenta or Monsanto under the new legislation, they will retain the intellectual property rights. If you save seeds from your first harvest, you can use them only on your own piece of land for non-commercial purposes. You’re not allowed to share them with your neighbors or with your sister-in-law in a different village, and you cannot sell them for sure. But that’s the entire foundation of the seed system in Africa,” ~Michael Farrelly of TOAM, an organic farming movement in Tanzania.

This is highly disturbing, yet the laws are part of the umbrella of G8 agreements which require intellectual property rights to be enforced as part of an exchange for development aid. This type of agreement is shockingly similar to the methods described by economic hitman John Perkins, who, in his book Confessions of an Economic Hitman, explained how aid and development agencies conquer sovereign nations by offering at in exchange for natural resources.

Imagine, for a moment, that you’re a poor African farmer. You may, or may not be, literate, but even if you are, you probably aren’t a lawyer able to spend the time and sort through all the tangle of legalese that your government has engaged in, forbidding you to exchange your natural seeds in traditional seed exchanges.

The result?

As the author of the article, Alex Pietrowski points out (and as many others have also pointed out): the loss of biodiversity in seeds, and a corresponding loss of ability of natural seeds and food supply to adjust to changing natural conditions. And that imperils everyone, in the name of corporate profits and power for Mr. Globaloney. Why? Very simple: nature can respond far faster to changing conditions, than can Mr. Globaloney’s scientists in I.G. Farbensanto’s laboratories.

But no mind: I.G. Farbensanto would rather imperil the entire human food chain – including their own – in the name of profits and power than wake up and exercise their (here comes those words they hate) God-given rationality, conscience, and reason. There’s only one thing worse than the atheist Communist, and that’s the atheist crony corporate crapitalist. Both are forms of organized nihilism, but the crony crapitalist does it so much better, and makes more money in the process. Like the Communist, they attempt to shut down real discussion, and promote a narrative.

You know me, however, and know that I cannot resist a bit of high octane speculation when I see stories like this. I cannot help recall the third episode of the third season of the American television series, Blacklist, starring James Spader as the arch-international criminal mastermind, Raymond Reddington. In that episode, titled “Eli Matchett,” Reddington and former FBI agent Elizabeth Keene (played by actress Megan Boone), stumble less-than-accidentally on a plot of an argibusiness giant, a fictitious corporation called “Verdiant Industries,” to corrupt their own GMO seeds by genetically engineering a virus which attacks them, wiping out the food supply they themselves have foisted on most of the world via crony crapitalist means, which are, as they always are, special “concessions” for their products from governments.

Of course, the fictitious “Verdiant Industries” has a ready-made cure for their own pestilence, which after the food crisis breaks open, they will then offer to a starving world at a handsome profit, and, of course, even more power.

The trouble is, having watched the GMO “agribusiness” industry over the years, I put nothing past them.

And hence my nickname for them: I.G. Farbensanto.

Raymond Reddington, we need you.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

CERES: The Ocean Of Tiamat

Contributor Post

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
K.M.
June 10, 2017

This year is busy in the science department of the Nefarium, as an interesting article was published by the Institute of Physics in the UK. The article:

DIFFERENT ORIGINS OR DIFFERENT EVOLUTIONS? DECODING THE SPECTRAL DIVERSITY AMONG C-TYPE ASTEROIDS was published in January and is now coming to our attention.
It discusses issues that directly relate to the enigmatic question of Ceres’ origin and the origin of the asteroid belt.

One of the first facts about Ceres is its actual composition. I held earlier that Ceres was about 50% water. Spectroscopy, the analysis of light representing the chemical structures that are reflecting that light, reveals that Ceres is coated with a scant two micron layer of surface dust from the asteroid belt itself. The content of the object is mostly water. (>50%)
Astonishingly, the study points out that underneath this two micron layer, Ceres in significantly comprised of oceanic compounds. It states:

“The surface composition of Ceres appears to be dominated by (1) carbonates, (2) phyllosilicates (possibly ammoniated), and (3) enstatite. The presence of anhydrous material (enstatite) on a surface otherwise dominated by products of aqueous alteration (carbonates, phyllosilicates) was unexpected. (The Astronomical Journal, 153:72 (10pp), 2017 February)

OK, so let’s unpack this. Carbonate refers to limestone. Limestone is most often the result of living systems. In other words, and country simple: sea shells falling to the ocean floor over millions of years. Phyllosilicates refers to compounds that have as their main structure that enigmatic competitor to carbon, Silicon. Phyllosilicates are found, according to Wikipedia:

“In geology and astronomy, the term silicate is used to denote types of rock that consist predominantly of silicate minerals. On Earth, a wide variety of silicate minerals occur in an even wider range of combinations as a result of the processes that form and re-work the crust. These processes include partial melting, crystallization, fractionation, metamorphism, weathering and diagenesis. Living things also contribute to the silicate cycle near the Earth’s surface. A type of plankton known as diatoms construct their exoskeletons, known as tests, from silica. The tests of dead diatoms are a major constituent of deep ocean sediment.”

In other words, either it’s a big magma pool or the result of diatoms, in other words, living systems.

Now, let’s talk about enstatite. Enstatite is created in magma and found in lava flows. As the authors point out, this is unexpected. What they mean is that if Ceres was an old thing from billions of years ago, they would not expect to find ALL THREE compounds existing together. Why? Because they are indicative of Earth-Like Conditions on Ceres, which because of its size is impossible. Only a much larger world, complete with a living ocean, and a hot magma center, could display such a combination.

In other words, we are talking about Tiamat, or Krypton. Ceres is the remains of the ocean of Tiamat.

Further (and this is speculative), the three bodies observed in the study, Ceres, Eugenias, and Hygia turn out a spectral analyses all very different from Ceres, indicating that more than one planetary sized object might be involved in the events leading to the development of the asteroid belt. The authors still hold that Ceres developed autologically outside of 10 astronomical units away from the sun. But they cannot prove it, and in my view they never will.

Occam’s razor impels us to seek a simpler answer, albeit one with complex implications. That’s Joseph’s hypothesis as discussed in The Cosmic War.

The razor thin two micron cover, with an even higher water content than I previously discussed, means that the date of the Cosmic war could even be closer than 3.25MYA. If it took a few million years for Ceres to stabilize, and that event happened recently, less than one million years, then it would make sense that Ceres would have such a thin coat of dust over its water features.
Also, Joseph’s analysis of interferometry shows that a shake-apart standing wave must be geared to the composition of the object to be interfered with. It makes sense that much of Tiamat’s great ocean, five times the size of Earth’s, would not fly apart as the rocky molten core of the planet did. Water as a fluid has a different viscosity and density and therefore a different interference formula and it apparently stayed together after the planet shook apart and exploded.

That the Planetoid Ceres is the remnant of a larger world and Ceres once hosted complex life is now effectively proven.

That there is now evidence that not only was Tiamat itself blown to bits, but that other satellite’s of Ceres or “other bodies nearby” may have been blown up along with it. Think of Dr. Tom Van Flandern’s “Missing Planets” assertion that Mars was locked in orbit around Tiamat, was hit in the face by it, which wobbled in its orbit until it flipped southward, explaining why the south is so much higher in altitude. With Hoagland’s work on Mars, the Moon, and Pluto behind us, the work of Van Flandern giving us a date of 3.25 million years ago, and Joseph giving us the political and physical analysis of the war, combined with this recent scientific evidence means that all the pieces are now falling into place. We know what, when, and likely how. What remains, is who?

I’m just wondering if our genetic cousins are still “out there” with advanced tech, or degraded and isolated, with their own questions about being alone, with their own Enrico Fermi’s wondering why it is so quiet.
Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________
Source:

The Astronomical Journal, 153:72 (10pp), 2017 February
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.