1816: A Year without Summer

The year 1816 was a year without summer in Europe and North America. Crops failed, people froze and starved. This was supposedly caused by a volcano eruption in Indonesia the year before. The volcano Tambora erupted April 10th, 1815. I say this was supposedly caused by the volcano, because I don’t buy it.

I came across this subject matter a couple of years ago when doing research on something else. So better late than never, right?


Dubious Claims

First of all, if the volcano erupted in Indonesia, in Asia, why it only affected Europe and North America? Well, according to Wikipedia:

“In China, the cold weather killed trees, rice crops, and even water buffalo, especially in the north. Floods destroyed many remaining crops. The monsoon season was disrupted, resulting in overwhelming floods in the Yangtze Valley. In India, the delayed summer monsoon caused late torrential rains that aggravated the spread of cholera from a region near the Ganges in Bengal to as far as Moscow.”

However, the source for that only links to Discovery Channel UK’s website. No mention of these disasters. Wikipedia continues:

“In Japan . . . the cold damaged crops, but no crop failures were reported, and there were adverse effects on population.”

The source for this is a dubious looking Japanese language article, but at least it’s something, and it does mention Tambora, but if I understand correctly (my Japanese is quite rusty), it says in Japan crop failures were not confirmed, and they were not adversely affected. In case I misunderstood something in the Japanese, let’s look at the Wikipedia quote:”the cold damaged crops, but no crop failures were reported, and there were adverse effects on population.” Does that make any sense? If crop failures were not reported, how can people today know that they happened? How did it adversely affect the population?

There’s a decent article on this event on ThoughtCo. website. It makes no mention of China or Japan, only Europe and North America:

“The weather in 1816 was unprecedented. Spring arrived as usual. But then the seasons seemed to turn backward, as cold temperatures returned. In some places, the sky appeared permanently overcast. The lack of sunlight became so severe that farmers lost their crops and food shortages were reported in Ireland, France, England, and the United States.”

Supposedly dust from Mount Tambora’s eruption over a year before “had shrouded the globe. And with sunlight blocked, 1816 did not have a normal summer.” They also quote a couple of excerpts from newspapers from the time. From the Boston Independent Chronicle, June 17, 1816:

“On the night of 6th instant, after a cold day, Jack Frost paid another visit to this region of the country, and nipped the beans, cucumbers, and other tender plants. This surely is cold weather for summer.

On the 5th we had quite warm weather, and in the afternoon copious showers attended with lightning and thunder — then followed high cold winds from the northwest, and back back again the above mentioned unwelcome visitor. On the 6th, 7th, and 8th June, fires were quite agreeable company in our habitations.”

From The Albany Advertiser, October 6:

“The weather during the past summer has been generally considered as very uncommon, not only in this country, but, as it would seem from newspaper accounts, in Europe also. Here it has been dry, and cold. We do not recollect the time when the drought has been so extensive, and general, not when there has been so cold a summer. There have been hard frosts in every summer month, a fact that we have never known before. It has also been cold and dry in some parts of Europe, and very wet in other places in that quarter of the world.”

There’s another excerpt from the same article mentioning a possible relation between sunspots and the cold summer:

“Many persons suppose that the seasons have not thoroughly recovered from the shock they experienced at the time of the total eclipse of the sun. Others seem disposed to charge the peculiarities of the season, the present year, upon the spots on the sun. If the dryness of the season has in any measure depended on the latter cause, it has not operated uniformly in different places — the spots have been visible in Europe, as well as here, and yet in some parts of Europe, as we have already remarked, they have been drenched with rain.

Without undertaking to discuss, much less to decide, such a learned subject as this, we should be glad if proper pains were taken to ascertain, by regular journals of the weather from year to year, the state of the seaons in this country and Europe, as well as the general state of health in both quarters of the globe. We think the facts might be collected, and the comparison made, without much difficulty; and when once made, that it would be of great advantage to medical men, and medical science.”

Notice anything lacking? There is no mention of the sun being obscured by dust, as the ThoughtCo. article claimed. Had volcanic dust “shrouded” the Earth, surely people would have commented on that too. The last newspaper quote does mention “the total eclipse of the sun”, so you might say that means the dust was obscuring the sun. The closest total eclipse of the sun prior to writing of the Albany Advertiser article published in October 1816 was July 6, 1815, which is probably referred to here. There were eclipses also in December 1815 and May 1816, but they weren’t total.

This wouldn’t be the only time that volcano dust is accused of causing mayhem, but I don’t buy it. In 2010 the volcano in Iceland, Eyjafjallajökull, erupted. Because of it air traffic was disrupted in many places. The volcanic ash was supposedly harmful to airplanes, so they couldn’t fly at certain times in certain places. I don’t know why, but even back then I thought the volcano was an excuse to prevent planes from flying. Maybe there was heavy clandestine military traffic in the air, and they didn’t want civilians to see it. Maybe it was something else.

It’s interesting that the old newspaper article mentions sunspots as the possible cause for the coldness, since there have been some modern day theories that sunspot activity causes the earth to warm instead the usual Greenhouse Effect/Global Warming/Climate Change CO2 claptrap. The ThoughtCo. article also mentions the notion that a volcano eruption caused the summerless year in 1816, originated a hundred years after it took place in the 20th century.


Do Volcano Eruptions cause Global Cooling?

I don’t see causation between eruption of Mount Tambora and the summerless year. There is correlation, but we all know the old cliché. So let’s see if there are other cases of volcanoes causing the climate to cool down.

According to Wikipedia, i.e. the establishment, there is. The page on Volcanic Winter has some examples, three most recent ones are:

1991: Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines cooled temperatures for 2-3 years

1883: Krakatoa caused four years of cold.

1815: Mount Tambora.

Now let’s look at some temperature charts I found with Google.

This starts with the year 1850, so Tambora’s effects cannot be seen. However we see sharp spike of warming around 1878 or so, then a year later the temperature goes back to normal. Around 1883 or so, when the Krakatoa erupted the temperature does indeed go down for a couple of years. Then it goes back up again. Around 1890, it goes down. Soon up. Temperature goes down in 1900. Were there volcano eruptions also in 1890 and 1900 as well that caused those cold periods?

Around 1990, the time of Mount Pinatubo eruption, there is hardly any change to be seen. The temperature just keeps zigzagging up and down, although overall its obviously climbing. Let’s look at another chart.

Krakatoa erupted 1883, and the four following years were cold, i.e. until 1887, according to Wikipedia. Sure, I don’t disagree with any of that, but according to this chart 1890 and 1905-1912 are much colder than the cool period following the eruption of Krakatoa. What volcanoes erupted then, Mount Obama and Mount Pikachu?

There’s also a brief cold period around the eruption of Pinatubo in 1991, but the same pattern happens also in the 80s before that and in the late 90s. More charts.

This is from the oh so trustworthy NASA. Do I even need to say anything about this chart? Same as the others in the sense that warm and cold periods come and go without giving a fuck about volcanoes.

According to this chart, during this 30 year period the years following the eruption of Pinatubo are indeed the coldest (although 1985 looks to be around the same point). It’s just that the time span is short, and its contradicted by the other charts. You can choose which one to believe. I believe none of them.

It might be that the Earth is getting warmer. That is a possibility, but I am certain it’s not due to CO2 gases. That is a political issue pushed for political reasons, not for scientific ones, which is why I don’t fully trust “scientists” and their temperature charts. Still if I was to do so, these charts would not support the argument that volcano eruptions cause cooling, except the last one, which is hardly objective since it has been made with the explicit reason of claiming that the eruption of Pinatubo caused global cooling. If there is some sort of causation between climate cooling and volcano eruptions, I would guess it’s more like the other way around; the climate starts getting cooler, which somehow causes a chemical reaction in the volcano. Not because volcano ash or dust blocks sunlight, which in turn causes cooling.


Eruption of Mount Tambora

Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, the founder of Singapore, wrote about the eruption of Mount Tambora (here Tomboro) on the island of Sumbawa in the book The History of Java published 1830. In April 1815 there were “tremulous motions”, report of explosions, showers of ash, clouds of ash overcast the sun and ash covered streets and houses. No such clouds were reported in Europe or America. On Java “explosions were heard at intervals, like the report of artillery or the noise of distant thunder”. Officers thought they were cannon fire, possibly from pirates: “The first explosions were heard on this island (Java) in the evening of the 5th of April: they were noticed in every quarter, and continued at intervals until the following day. The noise was, in the first instance, universally attributed to distant cannon: so much so, that a detachment of troops was marched from Djocjocarta, under the apprehension that a neighbouring post had been attacked”. After they saw ash, they realized it wasn’t pirates.

The book mentions Lieutenant Owen Phillips’ report of the incident. There were three pillars of fire on top of the volcano, and a powerful whirlwind that tore aparts houses, trees, people and cattle. There was a big tsunami as well. The eruption destroyed whole villages, but there were survivors: “In Pekáté no vestige of a house is left: twenty-six of the people, who were at Sumbawa at the time, are the whole of the population who have escaped. From the most particular inquiries I have been able to make, there were certainly not fewer than twelve thousand individuals in Tomboro and Pekáté at the time of the eruption, of whom only five or six survive.” I presume the “five or six” means five or six thousand, not five or six individuals.

The first time I read the account from Raffles’ book, I wondered whether really was a volcano eruption due to the cannon fire sounds and the whirlwind. However, apparently whirlwinds can accord due to eruptions. It happened last year as Mount Kilauea in Hawaii erupted last year. Although the intensity of the whirlwind at Tamboro was much stronger. Explosions don’t seem that unusual when it comes to volcanoes either.

There is one interesting addition to this story though. In 2006 volcanologist (and Tolkien character) Haraldur Sigurdsson found the remains of a “lost kingdom” in Tambora. He found bones, ceramics and remains of houses. NPR website says the following: “Few written records of the lost civilization exist. Colonial British officials visited Tambora shortly before it was buried. About 10,000 people lived there. The officials recorded 48 words of their language. It wasn’t Malay, like other Indonesian dialects, but more like the Khmer language of Cambodia.”

So there was a unique culture there with a unique language, and now it has apparently been wiped out by the volcano. Yet according to the British officer in the book, almost half of the people managed to escape. Something doesn’t add up.

Maybe since the people lost their homes, they were absorbed into other tribes, and lost their unique culture, since they had little choice but to adapt. Or maybe it was a very significant culture that someone wanted to wipe out. The volcano eruption might have been used as a cover for genociding them, or maybe the eruption was artificially induced to wipe them out. The explosions might have been actual explosives used as a catalyst for the volcano. Just throwing out ideas since something feels off.



I do not think that the eruption of Mount Tambora caused the summerless year in 1816. What caused it then? It was probably natural, though of course one might always speculate about ancient geo-engineering technologies, but I think it was a natural yet unusual occurrence. The theory that Tambora caused the cooling in the summer is probably just a result of the smugness of academics, who think they have all the answers, and no-one can conclusively disprove their accepted orthodoxy of a 200-year old event.

The eruption of Tambora was probably natural as well. Probably. I do wonder about the kingdom that was wiped out though.



Year Without Summer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer or http://archive.vn/oyQ40

Supposedly evidence of China’s summerless year: https://www.discoveryuk.com/

Evidence of Japanese summerless year: http://archive.vn/FzVNy or http://turning-point.info/YearWithoutaSummer.html

The Year Without a Summer Was a Bizarre Weather Disaster in 1816: https://www.thoughtco.com/the-year-without-a-summer-1773771

List of solar eclipses in the 19th century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_eclipses_in_the_19th_century

Air travel disruption after the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_travel_disruption_after_the_2010_Eyjafjallaj%C3%B6kull_eruption

Volcanic winter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter

The History of Java: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/49843/49843-h/49843-h.htm

Lava whirlwind caught on two-month mark of Kilauea eruption: https://www.upi.com/Lava-whirlwind-caught-on-two-month-mark-of-Kilauea-eruption/1521530721674/

Culture Destroyed by 1815 Volcano Rediscovered: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5237808


Sword Art Online: Alicization is crap

I’ve seen the first 13 episodes of the latest instalment in the anime franchise Sword Art Online. I thought that would be the whole series, but probably there are going to be 24 episodes like the earlier seasons. The story is full of plot contrivances and things that make you go “that doesn’t make sense”, “why are doing this instead of that?”. The focus of this article will be more on the bad story writing instead of my usual conspiracy or socio-political commentary, but there will be a little bit of that as well.


Two Boys and a Tree

The story starts off with two young boys trying to cut down a huge tree called the Gigas Cedar. One of the boys is Kirito, one of the main characters, who appears to be playing a new VRMMO, as is to be expected from the series. The tree is sucking nutrients from the soil thus preventing the people from a nearby village from expanding their fields. The villagers have sent someone each day to cut at it for the past 300 years, but there’s only a small scratch on it. At this pace, it would take at least 1000 years to bring it down.

I sort of like the idea of having to cut down the Gigas Cedar, however initially I was wondering if Kirito is playing a new game where all you do is, be a child who has to cut down a tree that takes years, isn’t it that a pretty boring game. Who would want to play that? Later on it’s revealed that Kirito isn’t in a new commercial MMO, but it’s a millitary project to create a new kind of AI in this simulated world. In that sense the tedious tree cutting is sensible enough, however it is exemplary of one of the flaws in the writing of SAO: Alicization. The juxtaposition between story exposition in the real world and the progression of the plot in the new fantasy world, Underworld, is godawful. There are whole episodes that focus on merely the technobabble aspect of the story, whereas for the most part when the story is focused on Underworld, Kirito merely happily plays the part of a fantasy world protagonist, unconcerned on what is going on in the real world. This is problem raises its ugly head already in the first episode.

The first episode lasts around 45 minutes, instead of the usual 20-22 minutes of most animes, and the other episodes in SAO: Alicization. Throughout the first half, we see Kirito and his two friends in this fantasy world, Eugeo and Alice, engage in mundane fantasy village children’s stuff. While Kirito and Eugeo are cutting down the Gigas Cedar, Alice brings them lunch, but since it’s summer they complain that food spoils too fast, unlike in winter. So Kirito comes up with the idea of finding ice, to keep the food cool. The three children travel to the mountains encircling the human realm, they find ice, the bones of a dragon, and a Divine Object sword. On the way back, they get lost, and end up going to the other side of the mountains, next to the  Dark Territory. The children see two knights flying on dragons fight, Alice stumbles and her hand hits the ground thus violating the Taboo Index set by the church. A head pops out of nowhere, which is clearly some sort of bot administering the rules within a computer program, witnesses the violation. The children return to the village, the next day an Integrity Knight flies in on his dragon to take Alice away to the capital to be executed for her crime. Kirito and Eugeo are sad.

While all of the above was happening, I found it moderately interesting, yet a part of me was merely wondering, what is going on, why should I care about the fate of these NPCs, why is Kirito playing this game with them, where is Asuna and their other friends? This wasn’t good storytelling, since the mystery did not take me deeper into the story, instead it disassociated me from it. I knew Kirito was playing a new game, yet it took them ages to reveal to the viewer what game it is, and why Kirito is there. If this wasn’t Sword Art Online, this kind of withholding of information might have worked, but since the viewer who has seen earlier seasons, knows the background, there isn’t much mystery, only a lack of relevant information. On top of it all, after Kirito logs out, we aren’t granted an explanation either, instead we see Kirito and his friends playing Gun Gale Online and talking about a new tournament. I couldn’t care less about this side story, which isn’t even mentioned in the following 12 episodes.


Soul Translator

When we finally get exposition about Underworld, we learn that a company called Rath has figured out where the human soul is located within the brain, using this discovery they have made the Soul Translator technology. Using this they can create a much more realistic VR experience than the technologies from the earlier seasons, and later on it’s revealed they can clone the soul of a human into a computer program to create more realistic NPCs by connecting to your Fluctlight (the soul).

As the characters non-chalantly discuss how a company discovered the soul, something which existence philosophers and religious people have been debating for millennia, and it’s only used to make make glorified video games, all sense of reality fell away from the series. This grand discovery, and it’s merely a plot convenience for a better VR system in this anime series focusing on VR. However, how they describe it, it sounds more like Rath merely located the consciousness or the mind of a person, not the soul, but since the show uses the term Soul Translator, and also the person in charge of Rath, professor(?, or whatever his title is) Kikuoka, uses the word “soul” also in the original Japanese (魂), I just have to call it the soul as well. This show is stupid.

It’s revealed that the secret VR project Kirito is involved with wipes your memories of the experience after you log out. This detail is a also dismissed by the characters discussing it as not a big deal. I would say this is an even bigger deal than the ultimate purpose of the Rath VR project, Alicization, which is to make an advanced AI to create killer robots (not that it’s not alarming, but as a story element, it’s dull and unoriginal). If this program can wipe your memories, you have to wonder, if it could also be made to create false memories. Could they use it to make Machurian Candidate type killers, or simply brainwash people who play your new VRMMO to vote for the correct political party, or make them always buy Pepsi.


The Contrived Disaster

Let’s get back to the story. At the end of the first episode Kirito is attacked by a surviving member of Laughing Coffin, the player killers from season 1. If they kill you in the VR game, you die in real life, and he’s armed with a Death Gun from season 2’s Gun Gale. The attacker manages to hit Kirito, who ends up in a coma after the doctors stabilize him. However they say Kirito has brain damage and may never recover. Then he is secretly transferred to the Rath secret island facility and conveniently put into the new Soul Translator VR machine, so he can continue the Underworld game. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

I figured the point of this attack is to make the morally dubious company Rath seem more acceptable to the viewer, or at least allow Asuna, Kirito’s girlfriend, who manages to sneak onto the island, to allow them to keep Kirito in the VR machine so the story can continue. After all, the company did secretly abduct Kirito, which Kirito’s friends figured out, and were not too happy about. Yet after Asuna finds out his situation, and Kikuoka tells her it’s the only way to make him recover, by playing this VR game, she goes along with it. Talk about a plot convience based on a plot contrivance, the attack by the Laughing Coffin member.

If attack didn’t happen, there would have been no need to send Kirito to the secret facility and the AI killer robot plotline couldn’t have been revealed, or Rath would have had abduct them, and thereby making them obvious bad guys.


AI Rights and Killer Robots

Let’s talk about Rath and their intentions. They created a computer simulation how this fantasy world develops over time (time goes much faster in Underworld than the real world). Their intention is to perfect a proper AI to create killer robots to fight in wars to save lives of the Japanese Special Defense Forces. Professor (let’s just call him that) Kikuoka seems quite passionate about this saving lives of soldiers bit. First of all, is Japan at war in the SAO universe? It takes place in the future, so maybe it is, although it doesn’t seem like it. What’s the point in creating robot soldiers to save lives if there is no war? Also none of the characters seem concerned, including Asuna, that they’re trying to create robots to kill humans, the enemies in any hypothetical war. Or are they going to give robots to their enemies too so that neither side loses human troops? It’s not as if civilian casualties are a thing…

Another thing, more importantly is that it doesn’t seem to occur to any of the characters that maybe the robots will disobey their masters, maybe Russian hackers will program them to attack Japanese instead, maybe there’s a glitch, anything like that. Apparently movies like Terminator and Matrix do not exist in the SAO universe, an anime whose whole premise is that somebody comes up with a neat new technology, it’s abused and people end up losing their lives over it. Yet none of the characters seem bothered by this possibility. I can understand that professor Kikuoka who is an amoral mad scientist, or the company, Rath, that makes money off of it, don’t mind, but how about Asuna, who is there on location to act as the avatar of the viewer? Her only moral concerns is that Kikuoka’s research might harm the AI Fluctlights in the program, or when they upload those AIs into killer robots and they go off to die in a war. Kikuoka says he cares more about the life of a single SDF soldier’s life than the life of a 100,000 (maybe it was a million, don’t really care) Fluctlights, and Asuna gets triggered by this. Who should I be rooting for, since Kikuoka seems more reasonable here?

Kikuoka describes the fantasy world of Underworld to Asuna. He says all of the people are very obedient to law, there are no murders or theft, and they slavishly obey the Taboo Index set by the church (which apparently does not forbid rape as is revealed later). He says this is a problem since he wants to create killer robots. However later on in the series it’s revealed that in the Dark Territory the monsters such as goblins also have Fluctlights, but they are more predisposed to slaughter. So they already appear to have AI willing to murder, so isn’t their experiment a success already? Why continue with the whole Underworld VR game?

Another thing that bothered me, is that the Fluctlights in Underworld are able to use magic. What would be the point, if what the programmers are trying to do is to develop AI for killer robots in the real world? The show does sort of answer this later on though, by revealing that the Pontifex Maximus of the church uncovered these system or console commands within the program to make the Sacred Arts. Still, why wouldn’t the scientists at Rath just disable these? Is there any good reason to let them have them, except that this is a fantasy world, and fantasy worlds are supposed to have magic. One character later on says that the people of Rath want the people in Underworld to suffer, so maybe the presence of these Sacred Arts create suffering, but I would say they relieve suffering more than create it.


Back to Underworld

Back in Underworld Kirito and Eugeo manage to cut down Gigas Cedar by using a Divine Object sword they found in the cave with the dragon bones. Like I said earlier, I sort of liked the idea of the tree, but after it’s cut down, we don’t really see how it affects the village nearby. After that the boys, who are now teenagers, join a sword fighting high school in the capital with alleged intention of saving Alice. It’s been 6(?) years since Alice was taken away.

However at the capital the boys simply go along with the sword academy curriculum. This takes them at least two years, I believe. They don’t attempt to go find Alice, and also Kirito seems unconcerned about his situation in the real world, Asuna or his friends. He simply plays along with it. You cannot say that he has amnesia, since when he arrives back in Underworld after being shot by the Death Gun, he remembers meeting with Asuna and Sinon he tries to log out, he wonders if Eugeo is an NPC or a test player, and so on. Apparently he doesn’t care about the real world anymore.

It also makes me wonder why is there such a sword academy in the world anyway. It has been mentioned once that there are rumours of goblins from the Dark Territory who have attacked some villages, and Kirito and Eugeo fought goblins once in the caves beneath the mountains between the human realm and the Dark Territory. It’s also mentioned that there are four empires in the human realm, and the possibility of war is mentioned. So I wouldn’t necessarily call this a plot hole, but it’s simply a lack of relevant information. It’s one of the classic sins of storytelling, show, don’t tell. The purpose of such a combat based academy would be obvious in any normal fantasy world, but not here. SAO: Alicization does not show you these things. If this was a good anime like Goblin Slayer, they’d shown at least a couple of rapes and a dozens murders by goblins by the time the boys reach the academy. Also, if there has been war between the human empires in the past, it renders professor Kikuoka’s claims about Fluctlights being too peaceful moot.

Anyway, Kirito and Eugeo eventually become seniors in the sword academy, and gain a page, or squire, under them. The boys meet two one-dimensional asshole bad guys, Raios and Humbert. They emotionally bully our heroes, but the protagonists handle it well. Their pages, both female, report that Humbert has been asking his page, another female, to fill odd requests for him, such as giving him massages while she is in her underwear. Kirito and Eugeo go to have a talk with them, but apparently Humbert’s sexual harassment continues, the two pages go to have a talk with the two assholes. Eugeo hears about this and goes to confront them as well. Raios and Humbert are drinking wine in their night gowns, and reveal that the female pages are tied up on the bed. After that, they attempt to rape them. After an excruciatingly long angst scene from Eugeo, he cuts off the arm from Humbert. Raios gets his sword, and Eugeo who is emotionally messed up, and because his eye blew out due to reasons not yet properly explained (this part of the storyline does sort of intrigue), is not in the condition to defend himself. So Kirito arrives and kills Raios.

Now let’s back up a bit to analyze Raios and Humbert. From the very first time you see them, you know they are assholes. As more is revealed, you find out they are high-ranking nobles who abuse that rank to be assholes to others. It’s fine to have this sort of one-dimensional bad guys as random thugs the protagonists have to deal with in a regular action scene, but it doesn’t work here. It’s simply bad writing. Moreover, before they attempt to rape the two pages, they say they are punishing them for disrespecting high-ranking nobles. It’s all legal and does not violate the rules of the school or Taboo Index. Apparently rape is just fine according to both laws.

The actions of Raios and Humbert don’t make sense. The two pages come to complain in their room, they tie them up on the bed, and proceed to drink wine until Eugeo arrives. Why didn’t they rape the girls before he arrived? Did they want to do it in front of Eugeo to humiliate him? That was a smart move, turn their backs to an enemy with a sword, who just happened to use that sword on them. They’re only a plot convenience to allow the main characters to do something heroic, and get them arrested.

Prior to this, the world within this VR game had been presented as almost Utopian, even if the Taboo Index is quite strict. Now they expect us to believe that rape is fine. Either because no-one ever thought of something like this (but why would theft be illegal if no-one does it either?), or because it’s really just a dystopian nightmare that looks good on the surface, but deep down it’s corrupt where people like these abuse the loopholes. Fine, if that’s the case, then show, don’t tell. Because based on what we’d seen before this, this is not the case.


The Tower

After the incident with the attempted rape and subsequent murder, Kirito and Eugeo are arrested by an Integrity Knight, who just happens to be Alice. She’s lost her memories though. The boys’ pages come running on the scene with their swords, they ask Alice Knight to be able to bring their swords with them. She agrees, but she will keep hold of them. This action denotes an important fact; Alice is not retarded, but the writer is. Why else would she agree to bring the weapons of these two violent criminals along, unless they were to break free at some point and get those weapons? Lazy story convenience.

The boys end up in prison in the mysterious tower waiting to be executed. Kirito acts very calm, as if this was part of his plan and that they can escape easily, which they do. At this point, I couldn’t help but wonder, what was the point of the sword academy story arc? Is it only to adhere to Japanese law which states that anime always has to have high-school drama? Why didn’t they try to break into the tower two weeks after arriving in the capital? Before that they could have done a bit of scouting and information gathering. They sure claim wanted to save Alice, but didn’t do anything for a couple of years. Maybe they couldn’t get in the tower, except by being arrested. Why didn’t they go on a Grand Theft Auto-like killing spree? That would’ve done the job. Well, that wouldn’t have been heroic. The boys remember their main mission only due to two random assholes that try to rape their pages. Or they’re forced to continue it.

Why in the first place is the viewer supposed to care about anything that goes on in this fictional VR world anyway? Because they’re like real people because of Fluctlights? I don’t. How about Kirito, how to fix him? He’s the main character from the earlier good SAO seasons. He doesn’t even remember his VR childhood with Alice.

Anyway, Kirito and Eugeo break out of prison, but are stopped by an Integrity Knight. They manage to short-circuit him by mentioning him of his heritage, memories that have been suppressed, but not wiped clean. Then a female Harry Potter sends them to her library via teleport spell.


Exposition Girl

Kirito gets two episodes worth of exposition from Harry Potteress who is some sort of program, Cardinal System, who was supposed to take care of the world, but the Pointifex Maximus stole it from her. This excess exposition, from these episodes and from earlier try to make SAO: Alicization seem like it’s hard sci-fi. As if the technological concepts or the moral dilemmas are something to be taken seriously. They’re not. It’s simply tedious. The original SAO was a fantasy anime with a sci-fi twist. It was fun, but nothing deep. The latest season is simply crap.

Back when I saw the original season, I thought the premise wasn’t that believable either. That a company could make this dangerous technology, and some guy would be able to weaponize it, and no governmental agency would foresee it, or that so many people would blindly buy into it without being suspicious. Now that I think of it, it doesn’t sound so far-fetched. I’ve seen so many cases of AAA game publishers sell buggy messes or crap ruined by micro-transactions, and still people pre-order them so that Sword Art Online seems quite plausible.

Anyway, back to SAO: Alicization. Harry Potter reveals how Underworld was created, or how the people populated it. Originally there were four scientists who logged in, they had children, then they had children and so on. However one of those four scientists was a selfish prick, and his offspring inherited that prickishness, and now the nobility and the church are populated by such people. Overall I find the notion that being evil is inherited or genetic quite intriguing, and it may have real world parallels to it, yet in the story it doesn’t quite work. It sounds more like a plot convenience. Especially, since as the story now tries to make us believe, the world of Underworld is this dystopian nightmare where the elites oppress the masses, but we haven’t seen it except in the case of Raios and Humbert, which still seems like an isolated incident. Once again, show, don’t tell. Are the good people in the world so dumb they don’t realize what is going on?

Oh yeah, at the end of the exposition session female Harry Potter wants a hug from Kirito to know what it feels like being a human. It comes out of nowhere. Complete emotional claptrap.

That’s as far I’ve gotten in the show. I think episode 14 is out, but I doubt I can stomach to watch anymore of this. I get the feeling the script writer doesn’t have any overall arching vision for the show, instead they write one episode at a time based on what seems “cool”. It’s awful and offends the viewer’s intelligence.

The Appearance of the NPC Meme

A few weeks ago, the latest iteration of, the NPC meme appeared on the face of the internet, mainly from 4chan and some other ethnic basket weaving forums. It makes fun of people who lack independent thought and repeat what the media tells them to think. NPC is a term meaning “non-player character”, which originates from tabletop roleplaying games or computer games. It refers to all characters not controlled by the player, but in reference to the recent meme it seems to especially apply to dull and generic characters. Here is an example of the meme:

There are various versions of the meme with the gray expressionless face, What makes the emergence of the meme curious is how it has caught the attention and ire of the main stream media, such as the New York Times and Kotaku. Twitter has also banned countless accounts propagating the meme. One of their concerns is how the NPC meme “dehumanizes” people. A curiously hypocritical assertion from the liberal media, as the following meme demonstrates:


The media and the mainstream establishment has been dehumanizing dissent for decades, from George W. Bush saying you’re with him or you’re with the terrorists, or the media labelling reasonable skepticism in pretty much any significant issue as crazy conspiracy theories. More recently anyone who does not go along with the liberal agenda is called a “Nazi”, and apparently it’s fine to attack, verbally or physically, anyone who is a “Nazi”.

Although originally, according to my understanding, the meme was not directed towards leftists or liberals, but towards all kinds of people who don’t seem exhibit independent thought processes, yet for some reason the liberals seemed most outraged by the NPC meme. It reminds me of the late William Cooper explaining the sheeple meme and people’s reactions to it. He said that if you’re walking down the street and you shout “stop thief”, the person who runs, is the thief. Same applies here, the person most getting outraged by allegations of lacking in originality appear to be the liberals who repeat what the TV tells them to.

What is curious though, is why would the media get involved in such a meme. One reason might simply be that the media is becoming less and less relevant, and they’re trying to seem more relevant by discussing the meme. Additionally, it allows them to cement more division between the political right and the left. Yet there is the possibility that The Powers That Be did find this meme threatening, and are trying to fight against its propagation.

The notion that some humans are like NPCs from games, is not new; David Icke has used the term Repeaters (people who simply repeat what the establishment says), then there’s of course the term sheeple, I’ve even heard the term Organic Portal be used in similar context, and myself I have used the term Simulacrum People back in 2013 and in 2014 I compared the thinking of Cultural Marxists to computer programming. The recent iteration of the NPC meme came to be when a 2011 article from Psychology Today appeared on certain internet forums. Based on the study referred to in the article, some people never thought in language, or they lacked and inner voice or inner dialogue. While accuracy of the study should certainly be questioned, it did create a decent amount of discussion. Do certain people really lack the capacity for inner dialogue, are the actually just NPCs? The following Reddit post was also found, which would suggest yes:


The core of the NPC question is a metaphysical one that asks what is a human being? Are we all ultimately chiseled from the same material, or are we not. There are certain references to two possibly types of humans in the Bible as well; in Genesis God says he puts enmity between the seed of the woman and seed of the serpent, and Jesus talks about the wheat and the tares. It is unquestionable that many people truly are NPCs, or sheeple, whatever term you want to use, based on their behaviour, but the question is, are they that way because they simply do not have any inner sense of self, or self-awareness, or have they simply been brainwashed?

In my experience, I would say that the NPCs truly lack some inner aspect that makes them truly human. This is a conundrum I’ve been trying to figure out since I was a teenager. I didn’t care about politics or issues such as that, but I cared about music, creativity, originality and uniqueness. I despised the consumerist pop-culture of the day, which in hind-sight isn’t as bad as today. It annoyed and troubled me that most people were content to consume whatever vapid media was thrust upon them on the TV or radio. It’s as if they had no taste of their own. A perfect example of this is when two class-mates of mine, when I was 15 or so, who always liked the music that was in the top 40-hits that week. One week a band that I actually liked managed to reach the charts, and for a brief period I could share my love for the band with those two people, although naturally it felt hollow.

Yet if it is true that some people truly are NPCs, it still is not easy to determine who is a genuine person and who is not. Moreover, if and when the actual NPCs hear about the concept of NPCs, eventually they will adopt the meme for themselves, and start calling other people NPCs without understanding what it actually means. As the NPC is incapable of inner reflection or understanding the concept of objective truth. They derive their sense of reality from society. What society tells them is true, is true, and they cannot fathom it to be otherwise. Now that does not mean that each NPC is a carbon copy of the other, as NPCs infest any walk of life as it gains enough popularity. On the surface, NPCs can vary greatly, but within their programming is the same. The liberal left is still the prevailing establishment, so naturally the majority of NPCs linger there, but certain there are many NPCs in the Trump-supporting right-wing, or even the conspiracy theorist community/ truth movement. It depends on the authority in the preferred community of the NPC, who constructs their sense of reality.

A more optimistic view on NPCs is that they are simply people who have been brainwashed to lose their ability for independent thought through conditioning and fear, but theoretically are capable of regaining their individuality. It’s possible this view is correct, but I do not possess it. However, if this is true sharing NPC memes, might aid some people in waking them from their stupor as they are forced to face their cognitive dissonance.

Yet if the NPC meme is real, it does have intriguing implications, such as the fact that democracy cannot work, as not all men have been created equal. The NPCs will always be manipulated by those willing and able to do so. As Abraham Lincoln said: “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” It also behooves those of us who are not NPCs to rise above to take charge. In my opinion, there are basically three types of people: the conscious or self-aware people, the NPCs, and then the malicious people who manipulate the NPCs against the conscious people, as is demonstrated in the meme below. To fix things, we must first recognize the problem, and not hold on to false ideas of equality.



I’d like to thank Mr. Charles McRowan whose comment on my previous article “How about DNA, is it another occult hoax?” inspired me to write this. The article, as the title suggests, explores whether the concept of the double helix DNA is truly science or simply the occult masquerading as such, and Charles left me the following message yesterday:

“Wow…just wow. It’s hard to believe with the vast amount of information available online, in university libraries, and various scientific journals ignorance to this level still exists.”

I was thinking whether or not I should write about the NPC meme phenomenon or not, but as I received Charles’ classic NPC response, I thought I should. Thanks Charles.



New York Times: https://archive.is/y6Gz0

Kotaku: https://kotaku.com/how-the-npc-meme-tries-to-dehumanize-sjws-1829552261

Right-wing watch: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/the-right-wing-internet-gets-hip-to-npc-memes/

Simulacrum People: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2013/12/09/simulacrum-people/

Insight into the Cultural Marxist mind: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/insight-into-the-cultural-marxist-mind/

Not Everyone Conducts Inner Speech: https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/pristine-inner-experience/201110/not-everyone-conducts-inner-speech

How about DNA, is it another occult hoax?: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2017/08/18/how-about-dna-is-it-another-occult-hoax/

Circumcision and the Bible

In May (although it became hot topic on the internet a couple of weeks ago) a Jewish man, Eric Clopper, held a presentation at Harvard titled Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story. In his presentation he decries circumcision as a barbaric and evil blood sacrifice, and wants to abolish this Jewish covenant. Clopper describes how the foreskin is an integral part in generating pleasure in the sexual act, and cutting it off replaces pleasure with rage. I recommend watching the two hour presentation. It did inspire me to write this.

In recent years I’ve grown interested in Christianity, but circumcision is one of the details that makes is very difficult to accept the possibility that the biblical God is the true and righteous one. Although the New Testament seems to reject the notion of circumcision, whereas the Old affirms it. Does it mean God updated his Terms of Service with the coming of Jesus Christ and rendered circumcision obsolete, or is circumcision a heretical practice that creeped into the Old Testament? However, if the former is true, it would contradict the biblical claim that God is unchanging, such as James 1:17: “Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow”, or Malachi 3:6 “For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed”. Of course you could argue that God doesn’t change, but his rules do, but that still makes God sound fickle. If the latter is true, it detracts from the reliability of the Bible.



What is circumcision? As has been practiced by Jewish rabbis for centuries, it entails cutting off the foreskin of a baby on their 8th day, sometimes with sharpened claws, and then the rabbi sucks the blood from the penis with his mouth. Sounds like an evil pedophillic blood sacrifice to me. This is called the metzitzah b’peh. Nowadays this practice is not always used, but I still don’t find modern or “medical” forms of circumcision much better. Circumcision is likely to instill some sort of trauma in the baby. In fact Eric Clopper points out in his presentation that certain rabbis commit circumcision for this very purpose, to associate sex with pain.

As far as I know, the Bible does not describe the exact circumcision procedure, such as the metzitzah b’peh, so I suppose it’s possible circumcision worked differently in the time of Abraham. Genesis 17: 9-14 states:

“And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.”

It appears that cutting the foreskin is still clearly mentioned in Genesis, even if they did do it in some more humane manner. Another interesting detail is that slaves bought with money by Jews should be circumcised. This not only suggests that God condoned slavery, but that in modern days the goyim, such as in America, who are circumcised are slaves of the Jews.

Why would God require the faithful to cut of the foreskin of their children and slaves as his covenant? One explanation that I’ve heard is that it represents dedication to spirit instead of the corrupted flesh. If circumcision hinders one’s ability to enjoy sex, and sex is the foremost method of engaging in pleasures of the flesh, cutting off the foreskin would signify dedication to spirit instead of flesh. I can understand as an abstract concept, but I cannot accept in practice. Moreover it sounds like a member of organized crime cutting off a finger to show loyalty to the Don. Also as Michael Glass wrote in his article Answers from the Bible to Questions about Circumcision that the foreskin wasn’t a mistake of nature as “The Bible says that God pronounced creation ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31) and that humans were made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). The Apostle Paul also said that God made every part of the body as he wanted it. (1 Corinthians 12:18).”


Circumcision in the Bible

Let’s have a look at some passages from the New Testament on circumcision. Certain passages are vehemently anti-circumcision such as Galatians 5: 1-3:

“Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.”

Paul calls circumcision a “yoke of bondage”, and apparently if you are unable to “profit” from Christ if you are circumcised. Galatians 5: 5-6 sort of contradicts it though:

“For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.”

According to it circumcision seems irrelevant, whereas faith in Jesus and love are necessary. First Paul had described circumcision as harmful, but then he goes to say it’s irrelevant. While I agree with his motives, it does not sound like he preaching the word of God, but spouting his own political views.

Philippians 3: 2-3 (also featuring Paul, or Timotheus) states:

“Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision [mutilation or cutting]. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

It describes circumcision as act of “evil workers” and encourages Christians to worship God in the spirit. For the Christian circumcision seems to be more of a symbolical act, cutting oneself off from earthly concerns, rather than mutilating one’s genetalia literally. In fact, Romans 2: 25-29 (also from Paul) mentions the circumcision of the heart:

“For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

This seems to be basically the letter of the law vs spirit of the law argument. If you are circumcized, you have to adhere to the letter of the law, but if you are not, you have to follow the spirit of the law. However, this does suggest that originally God cared only about the letter of the law, he wanted total obedience from his followers, but he softened up later and loosened his demands with Jesus.

What I see with Paul, is a liberal political pundit who is rebelling against the old, strict traditions of circumcision, and not as much a holy prophet spreading the word of God. However, the same could be said about the promoters of circumcision in the Old Testament, not them being liberal rebels, but political pundits. Let’s take a look at what Jesus has to say about circumcision in John 7: 22-24:

“Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day? Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”

Michael Glass writes on this passage the following: “the Greek expression for making a man completely well could also be translated as making him completely whole.” It could even be interpreted to say that Jesus cure and uncircumcized the man, i.e. grew back his foreskin. Whatever the case, it appears Jesus was not overly concerned about circumcision, or the Sabbath for that matter.

Also in John 7:22 as can be seen above, Jesus said “Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers)”. It would suggest that Jesus claims Moses did not teach circumcision, as is often believed, but it’s an older tradition. As Michael Glass writes:

“the Children of Israel abandoned circumcision during Moses’ leadership (Joshua 5: 4-7). Exodus 4: 24-26 tells us that Moses had not circumcised his own son.

This suggests several scribal traditions. In the first, Moses did not practise circumcision, and the custom was abandoned under his leadership (Joshua 5: 4-7).”

Joshua was Moses’ assistant who took over after Moses died. When he was in charge, he started circumcizing children again. So there is some anti-circumcision sentiment even in the Old Testament, and not merely from a random dude, but from Moses himself.

While Paul’s anti-circumcision rhetoric seems personally or politically motivated, it also does seem to follow Jesus’ approach as well, where a person’s health is more important than ancient religious customs. However Jesus did state in Matthew 5: 17-19 the following:

““Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Shouldn’t that contradict Jesus and his followers’ assertions against circumcision? It is part of the law, after all? Perhaps he is referring the Ten Commandments only, or perhaps the law employed by people, including passages in the Old Testament had been corrupted doctrines conjured up by men? Michael Glass makes similar suggestions:

“Jesus himself criticized the scribes and their traditions. (e.g., Matthew 15: 1-9, also Isaiah 29 :13). Jeremiah’s assessment of the Law must also be pondered.

How can you say, “We are wise,
and the law of the LORD is with us,”
when in fact, the false pen of the scribes
has made it into a lie?
(Jeremiah 8: 8, New RSV)”



I am still asking Christians, or anyone else, how do reconcile the disconnect between the contradictory positions on circumcision in the Old and New Testaments? Genesis 17 claims God told Abraham to circumcize his offspring, but in the New Testament Paul especially is vehemently against it. Did the omniscient and unchanging God change his mind on the content of his decrees, even his covenant, with men? Are there errors in the Old Testament where the word of God has been replaced with the word of men? Or was Paul merely a heretic speaking selfishly against circumcision?

Personally I would not have a problem had God changed his mind, although it would sort of suggest he is not all-knowing. Let’s take a hypothetical description of God. He is the Creator of all life and the world, and compared to human beings he might as well be described as all-powerful, yet even he has his limitations. He wants humans to have free will, but also to direct them to live their lives properly. First he makes a certain kind of policy or a decree in hopes of directing humanity in a certain way, but over the course of years he notices it’s not working. Then like a king, he makes a new policy which he hopes will be more succesful. I have no problem with such a concept of God, but it would probably go against Christian dogma as it implies God is flawed in some manner.

Another possible interpretation of this circumcision hassle is that, as is according to Christian belief, the Bible describes historical events from Eden up to the time of Christ from various different authors. While the events underneath the words of men have been true, but many of the smaller or even bigger details are up for revision. This would explain how when the Book of Genesis was written, circumcision was seen as a decree from God, but in the time of Jesus it was seen as a yoke. Both are merely views held by men. This view also makes sense to me, but it goes against the dogmatic view that the Bible is the infallible word of God.

I should note that my purpose is not to attack Christianity or the Bible, but to questionsthem. After all, if Christians wish to convert me, or others with similar views, they should have an answer to these questions. Christians who believe in Jesus and all that, should have asked themselves these questions as well. Why did God demand circumcision as the holy covenant with his followers back in the old days, but now you just need faith in Jesus? If your answer is: ‘it doesn’t matter. You just have to believe in Jesus.’ Then what’s the point in having the Bible in the first place? You know the book that describes what Jesus did and said. Ignore what the book says, just believe. Believe in what?



Sex & Circumcision: An American Love Story by Eric Clopper: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCuy163srRc

Answers from the Bible to Questions about Circumcision: http://www.cirp.org/pages/cultural/glass2/

Youtube HQ Shooting

Something happened to awaken me from my hibernation; the alleged shooting at the Youtube Headquarters last night. As usual, I find the story pushed by the media in this incident to be questionable, but I don’t want to jump to conclusions and call it necessarily a false flag or a hoax.

The official story is that a woman of Iranian origin, Nasim Najafi Aghdam, shot three other people, but did not manage to kill them and shot herself afterwards. The motive was supposedly Youtube censorship/demonetization of her videos. One of the people shot by Aghdam was possibly her boyfriend, according to the media.

First of all, how did she manage to get in the Youtube HQ with her gun? Don’t they have some sort of security around there? Or was she simply outside the compound when she started shooting? Does her assumed boyfriend work for Youtube, and that’s how she got there? Did she go there with the boyfriend, who thought she was simply going to complain to Youtube about their censorious actions and when she pulled the gun, he tried to stop her? Or maybe the whole story about her boyfriend is just fake news.

I just find this whole thing questionable. There have been some rumours of another shooter, a man with full body armour. This is quite a usual sighting among suspected false flags, but then the official story is that there was only one shooter and no mention of the body armoured shooter.

Then again this second shooter might be just a rumour, or even disinformation.

Then again I haven’t seen any actual evidence of any shooting having happened. No blood, no victims, no footage of a shooting. There are videos of police on the scene and people walking out of the Youtube HQ with their hands up. Although this does not necessarily imply there was no shooting, but it is also not reasonable to take the media’s word for it either. The HQ is bound to have loads of CCTV cameras in and around the compound, but I doubt we’ll be seeing any of that footage.

The victims of the incident were taken to Zuckerberg hospital, which got its name from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg having donated to it $75 million, according to Wikipedia. Were this some sort of false flag or a hoax, it’s not a stretch to assume that this kind of hospital might be easily coaxed to participate in the hoax.

Although the alleged shooter Nasim Aghdam is of Iranian descent, there are also some claims that she was Jewish, which is interesting.


The internet rumour mill has been speculating whether the alleged shooter was under some sort of MK Ultra mind control. I found one picture of her wearing a butterfly shirt, which might hint to this.


Aghdam also looks a but trannly to me with her long neck. Sort of resembles Michael Jackson.


I certainly won’t buy the main stream media’s narrative on this incident, but I don’t find the go-to conspiracy theorist narrative that this was a false flag/hoax to promote gun control satisfactory either. Surely some people will use this incident to promote the old gun grab angle, but it’s possible there was something else going on. Perhaps there is a shadow war brewing within the globalist elite, and this was an attack by one faction on another. Whether it was successful or not, perhaps this thing about Aghdam is just the cover story to hide the real incident, whatever it was. It’s also possible that they made this incident look like a false flag or hoax on purpose by inserting claims about a second gunman, as they know there is a growing sentiment among some circles to suspect these incidents are false flags, and when they see hints which lean toward the false flag explanation, they take it and don’t look deeper.

It is sort of frustrating looking at these incidents, as many people still believe the official story, be they left or right leaning, but try to insert their own narrative into it. Lefties are going to claim this is why they need gun control, or perhaps ignore the fact Aghdam was Iranian and make her out to be a violent White person. The right-wing on the other hand might grab onto the fact that she was Middle-Eastern, and ignore other relevant facts because it suits their anti-immigration narrative. I agree with their anti-immigration ideas to be sure, but I don’t want to use a lie to push the narrative. The most frustrating bit though is that you know the official narrative is questionable, but it is albeit impossible to find out what actually happened.



YouTube shooting: police identify woman who opened fire at HQ: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/04/youtube-shooting-police-identify-woman-opened-fire-hq

What we know about YouTube shooter Nasim Aghdam: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/04/what-we-know-about-the-youtube-shooter.html

Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital has received 3 patients from YouTube shooting, spokesman says: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-youtube-shooter-live-updates-zuckerberg-sf-general-hospital-has-1522796230-htmlstory.html#nt=card

Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_General_Hospital

Was the Black Pope busted for participating in Child Sacrifice Ring?

An article was published in Thepedogate.com December 24, 2017, saying the Black Pope Adolfo Pachón has resigned from the Vatican after being linked to the Ninth Circle Satanic Cult that engages in child sacrifice. This however appears to be disinformation.

The Black Pope, formally known as Superior General of the Society of Jesus, i.e. the Jesuits, is allegedly the power behind the throne in the Vatican.

The PedoGate article links to another article as its source: Neonettle.com. The Neonettle article, however, is from July 2014. It repeats the same information about Adolfo Pachón resigning due to being linked to the Ninth Circle. I also found an article from Alamoministries.com from May 2014 saying similar things, however it adds “Pope Francis, former Pope Ratzinger and Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby” to the mix.

The thing is however that Adolfo Pachón, also known as Adolfo Nicolás, resigned in October 2016, well after the claims from 2014, and well before the PedoGate article. He was subsequently replaced by Arturo Sosa. Pachón’s reason for resigning was the fact that he turned 80.

I believe the websites making these claims are purposefully pushing disinformation to discredit those who are looking into Satanic pedophile rings. I do believe the members of many powerful institutions in the world engage in pedophilic ritual abuse, including but not limited to the Vatican. However making easily disproven claims such as these only benefit the culprits.



‘Black Pope’ Pachon Resigns From Vatican After Child Abuse Charge: http://archive.fo/mHgCo#selection-299.127-299.153

Vatican After Child Abuse Charge: https://archive.fo/8jcQf

Catholic Jesuit Superior Resigns After Charged With Black Mass Child Sacrifices: http://www.alamoministries.com/content/english/newsreleases/catholicresigns.html

Adolfo Nicolás: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolfo_Nicol%C3%A1s#cite_note-12

General Congregation 36: http://jesuits.org/gc?dtn=dtn-20160711030307


Simulation Theory

I’ve heard the simulation theory being discussed as of late in flat earth circles. Some are for it, others are against. I’m really neither, so please allow me to explain what I mean by it.


The Definition

Wikipedia describes the “simulation hypothesis” as follows: “The simulation hypothesis proposes that all of reality, including the earth and the universe, is in fact an artificial simulation, most likely a computer simulation.” So according to the theory the world artificial and a facsimile of something real. I agree with the first point, but disagree with the second. I do think there is a creator who created the world, which would make it artificial in some sense, but I don’t think the creator simply made a bad copy of any original thing.

Let’s have a look of how the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the word “to simulate”:

1 : to give or assume the appearance or effect of often with the intent to deceive : imitate

2 : to make a simulation of (something, such as a physical system)

The first definition hints to an imitation that has been made with the intention to deceive. Let’s take a look at the definition of “simulation”:

1 : the act or process of simulating

2 : a sham object : counterfeit

3 a : the imitative representation of the functioning of one system or process by means of the functioning of another – a computer simulation of an industrial process

b : examination of a problem often not subject to direct experimentation by means of a simulating device

The first two explanations hint to a fake or counterfeit object, as number 1 refers to simulating, which is a deceptive imitation. The third explanation has a more modern concept of simulation, a computer program or other kind of device that attempts to duplicate reality.

In effect, if you claim that the world is a simulation, you are saying it is a counterfeit copy of the real thing. I think this explanation is a deception as well. I wrote about it back 2015 in Is the Matrix a Psy-Op? I gave three different interpretations of the message of the movie The Matrix. The third one was this:

“The world we inhabit is a prison designed to leech energy off of us.

. . .

While currently the Earth acts as a prison for us in some sense, yet I don’t think that is the original function of the Earth. It is a prison, because we (or our distant ancestors) allowed their minds to be taken over by something. I think something wants us to think this world is a prison, so we would leave it, or give it to them.”


My interpretation of the Simulation Theory

There are many NWO celebrities pushing the narrative that the real world is just simulation, such as Elon Musk, Jim Carrey and others including so-called scientists. Some even claim that the world is just a program running on the computer of some geek on another planet in another dimension. I have no objection to people discussing this as a theoretical possibility or a philosophical thought experiment, but it sure as hell isn’t science. It’s science fiction, yet an increasing amount of people seem to believe this narrative. This is alarming.

I think most people have the simulation theory scenario backwards, as if the creator is emulating computer programmers, when in my opinion it’s the other way around. Computer programs have two aspects to them; the code and the things the user perceives, mainly graphics and sound. If you are playing a computer game, a simulation of sort, you see characters acting in the world, you hear sounds, but you do not see the computer code (as Neo did in The Matrix) that really animates everything in the computer simulation. I think this is basically how the creator did it: he created spirit (code) which animates matter (the graphics).

When a programmer creates a simulation on his computer, he is in a sense playing God. He is emulating the principles that the creator of our world used to create everything. Of course, the computer simulations made by man are only a crude copy compared to the complexity of the real world. In this sense, I find the simulation theory to be a reasonable attempt at explaining reality. However, to claim that our world is an actual simulation, i.e. a facsimile of some unknown real world, is utter nonsense.

The Bible states in John 18:36: “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world”. I think it means that God’s kingdom is not in the physical world, but in the world of spirit or heaven. However, it does not mean that the physical world is a counterfeit copy of the spirit world. The esoteric notion “as above, so below” might mean this.

In Buddhism there is the concept of “maya”, which is usually translated as “illusion” that keeps mortals from seeing the truth. However, according to my understanding it means “skewed perspective” instead of illusion. These two different interpretations hint to different outcomes. If we live in an illusion, it would suggest there is some malicious force or entity that has trapped us in some sort of maze that we have to escape, or perhaps random chance has trapped us there. If we merely have a skewed perception of reality, then we simply have to understand that we do not perceive reality as it is, or that there is more than meets the eye, i.e. the invisible spirit world.



I don’t think reality is a computer simulation, but simulation theory has it’s place. The creator does not emulate computer geeks, but it’s the other way around. I don’t think the reality we experience is a facsimile of some distant and unknowable reality that “scientists” hint at, but have no proof of.



Simulation hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis

Simulating: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulating

Simulation: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulation

Is the Matrix a Psy-Op?: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/04/16/is-the-matrix-a-psy-op/