Final copy-edited version posted: 11:54am est, 12/17/2012.
From the outset of his appearance on my personal horizon, Vice-President Harry S Truman was a man whose principal personal successes in office, had been his participation in several varieties of what are fairly identified as bad things done against the vital interests of the people of our United States.
On this account, there is an essentially elementary principle of economy which demonstrates exactly how a set of London-directed, Wall Street interests’ sometime hat-peddler, Truman, had been used to betray our nation with his economic shell-games deployed against the legacy of the United States’ President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
On this account, as O.S.S.’s William J. Donovan knew, and confided to one of his trusted colleagues at the close of his own last visit to the office of a dying President Franklin D. Roosevelt: what had been the truly great U.S.A., under Franklin Roosevelt, was now about to be ruined another time. I was not present at that occasion; but, a relevant later colleague of mine was. The great moment of the life of the United States, which Franklin Roosevelt had represented, would not be experienced soon again.
Unfortunately, it now appears—I emphasize “appears,” that very few among the current members of the U.S. Congress today, particularly the Demoncrats, have been willing to discuss exactly how the Truman swindle worked against the United States, as it did, nor how a U.S. economy had been restored, later, for a few years, through principles expressed under the Presidency of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt’s choice of Presidential candidate, John F. Kennedy. That, unfortunately temporary interval under Kennedy, had been a period of great achievements for as long as a recently elected President Kennedy lived, banished especially, the awful shock experienced after his brother Robert, a leading Presidential candidate, had been murdered, too.1The powers associated with an incumbent President of our United States are so extensive and deep-rooted, that the failure to mount a hot pursuit of his assassination, such that of Abraham Lincoln, means that only a wide conspiracy could prevent a throughly efficient investigation. That is not merely a matter of patriotic sentiments; it is a matter of a toleration of what is, in effect, an extended conspiracy. Negligence respecting the assassinations of such as Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, and the two Kennedy brothers, are among the most undeniable examples of the powerful British imperial influence of the British empire’s penetration of the financial systems of the United States on this account. The case of the Presidency of Theodore Roosevelt effected through the assassination of McKinley, is among the most naked examples of a treasonously motivated betrayal conducted, as recorded by Anton Chaitkin, by nakedly British family interests operating within Theodore Roosevelt’s family circles’ role in the education and related connections of Theodore Roosevelt’s treasonous uncle and patron James D. Bulloch.
At that latter time, President Richard Nixon was, virtually, “a new Truman,” the one whom John F. Kennedy had defeated in his own time. Therefore, I wish to show you, now, how political swindlers in the likeness of such as Truman and Nixon, or the evil Andrew Jackson earlier, must be defeated, and our republic thus resurrected.
The problem, still today, is “all about” the way in which citizens have been repeatedly duped into permitting themselves to be virtually swallowed up by wildly Romantic (specifically, “Jacksonian”) frauds concerning the meaning of “money.” I point to the relevant report by my colleague Michael Kirsch.
What became known as the U.S.A.’s (and others’) “Victory in Europe,” called “V-E Day,” was soon followed by “V-J Day.” Had the U.S. forces won that war in Europe prior to the time which came for the selection of Harry S Truman as Vice-President, the post-war disaster of the U.S.A. would, almost certainly, never have occurred. Truman’s ascension to the Presidency, when seen as coincident with the effect of what General Douglas MacArthur had recognized as the evil at the time, was the long-ranging strategic disaster, a created disaster of U.S. President Truman’s launching a worse than absolutely unnecessary, strategically, and otherwise criminal, nuclear bombing of the noted two cities of Japan.
The intrinsically clear proof of General MacArthur’s understanding of Truman’s unwarranted, brutish war crimes, such as those of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,2“MacArthur & Eisenhower,” by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. In EIR, Sept. 24, 2010 [http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2010/3737mac_ike_no_consiracy.html]; or LaRouche PAC [http://larouchepac.com/node/15819]. has been proof of strategic folly which came with the added dimension of Truman’s and Churchill’s criminal folly in this matter.
Ironically, it became evident that Winston Churchill, his flunky, President Harry S Truman, and the evil Bertrand Russell, had all wildly miscalculated in presuming that a nuclear attack upon the Soviet Union could have succeeded with virtual impunity during the span of the years immediately following 1946. Not only had the Soviet Union surprised both Churchill and Bertrand Russell by its actually independent development of a coordinated, deployable nuclear arsenal, but the Soviet scientists under Stalin’s command had given the U.S.S.R. a nuclear arsenal which was comparable to that of the Anglo-American alliance at that time. Churchill and Bertrand Russell had been duped, in this case, by nothing as much as their own stupid arrogance, and their common hatred of, and fear of, the legacy of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.3In truth, the Soviet Union had copied some of the Anglo-American nuclear weapons design, but it had also created its own original design, as the Anglo-American party would then soon discover to its own great embarrassment.
So, later, a brutishly bumbling Nikita Khrushchov had built up a new conspiracy, one developed explicitly in personal coordination with Bertrand Russell. This was a piece of folly which has long been echoed as a tendency for the specific strategic bungling committed by every leading damned fool since the death of Stalin, in the former Soviet Union and its successors; successors such as the typically British opportunists, such as Khrushchov and Yuri Andropov in Russia, were types which are still to be found there, or in notable places in the Mediterranean, the Caribbean of the Americas, and scattered elsewhere, today.
So, we now prepare to enter a domain of discussion, here and now, a discussion which must be intended to push aside the greatest of the common strategic sillinesses to which numbers of Americans, Russians, and others, are still prone today: the folly which Winston Churchill’s crew induced in the United States under Truman, to launch the atomic bombs on Japan, and which grips the probably early fate of the entirety of the human species today.
Since Truman’s and Churchill’s common great crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the entire planet is now threatened with the “super-powers’” common thermonuclear extinction, one rooted still in the game which Winston Churchill and Bertrand Russell had attempted to play out in 1946. The scheme by Bertrand Russell, Winston Churchill, and President Harry S Truman, had plotted a leading common game aimed at their common, Soviet target for destruction, a destruction, intended for their part, to accomplish the final eradication of the formerly sovereign nations of western and central Europe, and including Russia, while also striking a deadly blow against any future sovereignty of a United States which is presently under the thumb of British-Saudi-controlled asset Barack Obama. How could we have actual heroes to be found among the ranks of what have been, chiefly, the credulously foolish, leading political circles of both the U.S.A., and the British empire’s presently virtual ownership of the nations of western and central Europe?
So, it had come to be the case, that the U.S.A. had then acquired what seemed, as to some foolish, leading and other Americans of the post-World War II period, what had come to represent the likeness to a great internal war-debt; but, that at the same time, that U.S. economy which had emerged from the war, had gained the great potential benefit of a margin of credit which was available to be used for the post-war advantage of the future, an advantage which had been potentially far greater than that margin of the war-debt itself. Unfortunately, the entry of Harry S Truman into the Presidency, had taken away from us that good from our history which we had gained under our President Franklin Roosevelt. The effect was in stark contrast to the far worse, present time under a President Barack Obama who has proven himself, so far, to have been already almost the worst scoundrel of them all, excepting the virtually global, British-Saudi imperial monarchy which happens to own the Obama of today.
Therefore, reconsider the outcome for the World War II production-line and the related resources available to be used for growth of an effective civilian-economy sector’s turning the growth of potential away from the effects of war-production, which had represented the resources to be used in a new way, according to what had been the intent of the deceased President Roosevelt, at the close of warfare in World War II. The purpose of the development of this asset should have been, but for the perversions introduced by Churchill and his nasty little Wall Street stooge, Truman, the Roosevelt intention which was clearly for a determined conversion from war into those peace-time economic triumphs which had been waiting to be expressed in new capital improvements wrought by the rate of rapid expansion which should have been fostered, had the peace-time productive capacity been set into motion immediately with the settling of the terms of surrender accepted by Japan. An otherwise unnecessary devotion to the prospect of a renewed world war, spoiled what should have become the post-World War II “economic miracle” which the prospect of marshalling competing forces in nuclear warfare had almost throttled.
Instead, the lurking spawn of “The Evil Old Herbert Hoover,” were reinstated in a dominant role by the Republican faction operating under the umbrella of Truman’s nominally Democratic Presidency. Precisely that, was done under the influence of Winston Churchill’s significant Wall Street connections of London, a kind of influence which had been originally displayed in President Andrew Jackson’s nominal influence, in a precedent set by those British agents and traitors to the U.S.A. who were leading the Andrew Jackson Presidency substantially, and treasonously, from behind the scenes, a style in scoundrels which was to become essentially similar to that of a passing case of President Harry S Truman.
Then, in the course of time, there came a great moment of opportunity, expressed, first, under President Eisenhower, and which promised to be continued for as long as President Kennedy had lived for his mission as President. Thus, the damage done to the both the U.S. economy and its well-deserved heritage of the Roosevelt administration, were seemingly on the mend, until President Roosevelt’s death. The worst came clearly, up to the moment of an awesome 1946 moment of horror created, with Truman’s complicity, by Winston Churchill in part, but chiefly the chronically pure evil of a Bertrand Russell who would later steer his recurring lurches toward nuclear warfare, which were each and all the threats of nuclear warfare, including those arranged by aid of Khrushchov’s not really successfully secret pact with Bertrand Russell, like the later Soviet official who killed the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI) which those such as U.S. President Ronald Reagan had joined in proposing, repeatedly! As I warned virtually to the relevant exact date, the role which had been played, on the Soviet side, by Yuri Andropov, and, later Mikhail Gorbachov, had led to that timely realization of the relatively date-certain collapse of the Soviet Union, a collapse which, I had forecast to occur approximately five years after what I had virtually pin-pointed as the continued sabotage of the SDI, were Gorbachov’s role to be continued.
During that same interval of time that President John F. Kennedy was leading the U.S.A., a Spain-based, international organization of murderers, which had been organized for the repeatedly mustered, fascist attempts at the assassination of President Charles de Gaulle, found temporarily proffered employment of their peculiarly treasonous talents in a place conveniently near to the Texas border of Mexico. Before the U.S. institutions which had been led by President Kennedy could recognize what had actually happened as the assassination of President Kennedy, the U.S.A. had been plunged into a calamity from which it has never recovered, from the lasting effects of that assassination against both the spirit and principle of our nation and its people, all chiefly due to the effects of the continuing “cover up” of the realities of that assassination.
The “cover-up” of the facts of the assassination had created a spirit of increasingly hysterical desperation among our citizens, beginning already at that time. Our loyal citizens hated and distrusted the experience thrust down their throats by the cover-up, but foresaw no remedy for lacking the needed proof which would have encouraged them to wreak justice on the relevant actual evil-doers, once the truth were actually uncovered. The new war in Indo-China, its prolongation, and its sheer folly, brought on the drugs and other moral sicknesses of degeneration of our youth of that time, a degeneration by aid of which British imperial interests had ruined us, up through the present time.
So, from the launching of that war in Indo-China which leaders such as President Kennedy and General Douglas MacArthur had been committed to prevent, the U.S.A. has never actually become its true full self again, up through the present date.
Now, about this, some crucial sort of further explanation, all this from me, is very much in order. Very few among well-known political economists today, if there were actually sufficiently competent ones among those of my professional U.S. rivals still actually existing, have shown much actual competence on the subject of the urgently needed remedial principles of a successful system of national economy.
Any actually sane economy, represents a blessed state which is presently far, and now long removed from the top-down policy-shaping of our nation today. Such a needed, but lacking spirit of sanity, which is to be expressed in credit uttered as national credit, must be secured by emphasis, not on merely monetarist schemes, but on those same principles of economy embedded in the legacy of the American Revolution, and as in the incumbencies of both President George Washington and the world’s leading economist of that time, Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. All of those achievements were expressed then, despite the political American skunks bearing a contrary set of opinions on policy, then as now.
Therefore, we must now turn to rely on technically upgraded energy-flux densities of physical-productive capabilities, as so defined in terms of both quality and scale. Improved capabilities in scale, as per-capita and per unit increase in productivity of productive forces, are the means for a recovery of the type which had been required in the immediate post-war economic programs, and are still more urgently required for our republic since that time.
Thus, we have suffered the treason against our United States and its systemic intentions which the persistently treasonous President Andrew Jackson had accomplished, as if despite himself, in turning the top-down control of our nation into the control by British monetarist agencies under the Manhattan-centered colonies of the imported British monetarist tyrannies.
So, ultimately, since the assassinations of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and his brother Robert, these same treasonous influences have been, more and more the representatives of a trend of predominance of what have been chiefly swindles, such as the repeal of the original Glass-Steagall law, or such as the mere farces which had created a vast and essentially unnecessary level of net accumulation of hyper-inflationary, now intrinsically worthless national debt now accumulated under the Barack Obama administration.
The principal source of such a post-war economic problem for our nation, had been, historically, at first, the result of Churchill’s policy of forcing a prolonging of World War II into an earlier mobilization for new wars, through stalling on the principal objectives for the Allies’ war-time achievements, into the kind of diversionary battlefield-swindles sort of warfare typified by the model fraud of the British command under high-pitched, squeaking, Field Marshall Montgomery: strategic policies of a type which prompted the complications which delayed the essential victory to a point much later than would have been required, had the leaders like Generals Douglas MacArthur and his associate Dwight D. Eisenhower not been burdened by the wicked schemes of Winston Churchill and his slippery tribes.4“Squeaky” Montgomery was notorious, not only for his racist sentimentalities, but for his sundry incompetencies expressed during the course of World War II. Montgomery flubbed his opportunity to rout the flank of the Afrika Korps in retreat, and that repeatedly, notably in respect to Rommel’s retreat toward East Africa’s Mediterranean coast. The same must also be said of the case of Sicily, and the monstrous fraud in deployment of forces under the British command of Montgomery, as both in Sicily, then, and in the Low Countries, later, when a break-through into Germany under Patton was otherwise virtually assured, as in Montgomery’s customarily silly way of betraying his nation’s allies, as also to be seen in the comparison to Patton’s decisive strategic flanking operation in Sicily. Admittedly, Patton himself could be troublesome in respect to his own form of dissident choice of agenda, but that is a different, if ugly matter.
I have had some relevant personal experiences, not in combat as such, but bearing on that war-time and related experience which I had known, especially during both my own youthful experiences as a soldier in India and Burma, and from my relevant associations in Europe and elsewhere, decades later.
For example: with the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, the essential issue was the Truman administration’s capitulation to the policies which would be demanded as part of the role of Britain’s Winston Churchill in bringing about the wasteful, and (for us) implicitly treasonous dissipation of convertible productive potential which was “frittered away” under the shared policies of both Churchill and Truman. Such has been all-too-frequently our Presidents’ legacy as I have outlined the principal points above: that became the state of affairs once President Franklin Roosevelt’s death had cleared the way for Truman’s complicity with that ugly, post-war direction which led us into the ugly farce of the 1948 U.S. election.
That much said, now, in preparation, I tell a little personal, but nonetheless revealing story from the concluding period of World War II warfare, as follows:
At a certain pregnant moment of a few weeks duration, I had been stationed in what also served as an India-based U.S. encampment, Kanchrapara, which I encountered twice in my assignments to that location. The first, was the occasion on which President Franklin Roosevelt’s death had just been reported to us. That evening there, brought a number of my associates in the U.S. Army service to murmur their proposal for my agreement to a discussion to be held by me, discreetly, there, after that nightfall. I was not surprised by the nature of the subject which would be presented to me for my reply, by later during that same evening.
My very first response to those colleagues gathered under that evening dusk in Bengal’s Kanchrapara, was to acknowledge the clearly shared intention which had brought us together for this brief moment of discussion. The summary of my opening response to the question, resonates for me clearly to the present day:
I had said: “We have been under the leadership of a great President. Now he is gone. The new President is a very little man, and, therefore, I am afraid for all of us.”
Then, I concluded with briefly stated, additional words conforming to my intention: We shall do what we have to do, in our duty in the war now still before us.
Even after our war were over, in a later time when I had left northern Burma’s Myitkina, but remained in India for a time approaching a half year, I had concluded my journey in military service in India with devotion to what was, for me, a new global mission, for which my implied earlier oath to the memory of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, was continued as my devotion through to the time of the present date here and now.5Cf. “MacArthur and Eisenhower,” op.cit.
There was no specific plan in my initial reorientation back in the United States; there was only a sense of a continuing commitment to a qualified dedication to the legacy of service which was continued for me in the circumstances which had become the often dismal habitat of a United States under the wretched Truman.
For the most part, during the period after the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, in my travels in service abroad, the spirit which I had shared, briefly, with some comrades in the weeks immediately following the news of the death of President Roosevelt, “got lost” somewhere, somehow, between that event, and my remaining time in Asia.
Later, when I had been shifted from a post-war Northern Burma, and then back into Bengal, there was something alien in the contrast between the typical outlook of those veterans who had been already returned, only slightly earlier, from overseas service then, chiefly back into our United States, and those who remained some months, as I did, in India. On that point, my present judgment of the cause and nature of the difference in my war-time and later experience, has continued to be “instinctively” correct, if to be seen today only in the general outlines of my relevant experience. This has served as the political ground on which, so to speak, I have walked, ever since, to the present moments of today.
However, there was another, crucial factor respecting the background of my personal experience, which had actually come to the surface earlier. That was most readily typified by my good fortune in rejection of the dogma specified for classes in Euclidean geometry.
The rejection had dawned on the day I had first left, bitterly shocked, from the classroom in “Plane Geometry,” and has persisted ever after. In that moment I was experiencing the benefits, and also the certain sort of hazards of knowing with appropriate certainty, that “Euclidean geometry” is an ontological fraud. This had been the knowledge of a fact which had, so to speak, “fallen upon me,” from my observations of what I recognized as being an exemplary definition of the meaning of “physical science,” rather than the relative silliness of a mere Euclidean geometry. The latter conclusion had been expressed in observations which I had made, initially, as an outcome of a series of what were repeated as occasional, and somewhat inspired visits to the site of the intrinsically high-rise construction in progress at Boston’s Charlestown Navy Yard.
Physics does not find any natural alternative in either plane, or solid geometry, when either, or both are considered as merely mathematics as such.
The relevant point of what I have stated in this report this far, had had the effect, of planting in me a strong, and growing, systemic kind of hostility to the legacy of the Newtonian dogma which was customarily prescribed in the secondary schools which I attended, and, also, my qualms concerning mathematics as such at the university at which I was instructed to repeat what I had already experienced in the settings defined directly, or implicitly, by a Senior High School education.
More important than those concerns, was the fact that I was virtually “driven” into emphasis on Classical artistic culture as the needed escape from that in which I could never permit myself to believe as a mere mathematics. It was not to be considered as a flight from the “linear” basis of commonplace entries into a linearized physics, which had prompted that preference. My reaction was one of sensing an inherent fraud in what my contemporaries and relevant others seemed to believe, believed essentially because what most among us had been induced to “really believe,” was the importance of submitting to demands for showing respect for whatever sort of “popularized opinion” which a virtual “mere luck of the draw” had supplied. It was real physics, not the prattle attributed to the silly witchcraft doctor, Isaac Newton, which I desired most passionately. Nicholas of Cusa supplied an enriched confidence in such matters.
Now, at my present age, many things have tended to become much clearer. It is here, that that mission, not mere sense-perception, supplies the definition of one’s actually efficient purpose in life. My stunning experience with the work of the famous Nicolas of Cusa, and of the connection of Cusa’s discoveries to the solution for the essential principle of physics presented by the great discoveries of principle by Johannes Kepler, and the found distinctions lurking still in the discoveries of Bernhard Riemann, and, then Max Planck and Albert Einstein, most readily locate the implications of Riemann’s crucially needed contributions to the cause of humanity.
As in all which I have repeatedly emphasized on this account, the most significant fraud against which I have contended, has been that located in my experienced association with the reductionists’ attacks on such followers of Cusa, as Kepler, Leibniz, et al. The latter’s discoveries had been already accomplished “as fundamental,” as prior in authority to the great hoax of Newtonian delusions which had waited upon the delivery of news of a certified death of Leibniz, before launching that complete hoax which had became “Newtonian physics.” There is no actually competent basis for attempted rejection of the specific fact which I have emphasized here and now on that account.
The summary proof runs as follows.
The crucial error underlying the modern systemic blunders inherent in any reliance on a so-called “principle of sense-perception,” is the credulous “believer’s” desire to be accepted as sharing the corruption implicit in a common folly of the Newtonian tradition. The actually criminal aspect of that Newtonian fraud, has been a commonplace attempt by the standards of today’s world, an attempt to derive physical science from experiments located within the mere presumption that universal principles must depend upon experience bounded within the fancied domain of mere tastes in sense-perception.
That credulousness to which I have just pointed, has been the popular great idiocy which may be justly attributed to the antecedents and consequences of a reductionist dogma introduced by the likes of such oligarchists as Aristotle and Euclid. It has been chiefly the discoveries of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, and of his faithful student Johannes Kepler, in which the history of an actual physical science is to be centered, as in the entire sweep of an anti-Newtonian, actual progress situated within the context of a type of modern physical science exemplified by the explicit arguments of such notable true physicists and “Kings of Science” as Gottfried Leibniz, and such among his followers as Gauss, Lejeune Dirichlet, Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein, all to be summoned against the plague of the Twentieth-century reductionists.
It is not “sense-perception” which defines the actual “laws of the universe,” but the laws of the universe are those which must be recognized as properly determining the nature of the principles on which a correct assumption respecting the shadowy mere experience of sense-perception must be founded.
The root of the confusion against which I am objecting here, is the intrinsically Newtonian error of defining physical science as a substratum of what is merely mathematics, rather than the physical science of a Nicholas of Cusa, a Johannes Kepler, a Gottfried Leibniz, et al. The crucial quality of arbitrary error to be corrected, or simply recognized as foolishness and eliminated, is the presumption that mathematics defines physical science, whereas precisely the opposite is the actual case: mathematics must be defined as being primarily a subordinate of the primary lawfulness of the universe, rather than being the ultimate futility of the practice of worship of the mere shadows cast as sense-perceptions.
Finally, on the same point emphasized here so far, mankind has scarcely begun to understand the more profound significance of the existence of Mars for mankind. “Curiosity” was not, by any fair standard, the first unmanned Mars-landing to gain significance along what had become standard lines; but, the justified concern of the threats to mankind on Earth, from what might be regarded as loose asteroids and comparable cases, has prompted a qualitative shift in the way in which the relationship between Earth’s and Mars’ orbits must now be redefined for the needs of defense of mankind. A certain consequence of the success of “Curiosity” now coincides with the crucially essential notion of a defense of Earth against deadly asteroids and comets. That practical concern changes essentially everything considered until now.
Now, the relationships expressed in terms of the speed of light between Earth and Mars, and also the reverse, assumes a foremost significance for devising a functional network of counterposed motions, at “the speed of light,” to be used by mankind, from, and to Earth.
Since present technologies in relatively immediate foresight, now threaten to be limited to those lapsed times of transit from Moon to Mars (and return) which fall critically short of the goal projected for thermonuclear-fusion-directed ascent-descent in the course of transit from Moon to Mars, and return: In the meanwhile, we must rely upon more modest goals of actually functional forms of a transit of effects between the two planets. It is the mapping of the contents of, and in the space between the Mars and Venus orbits, which has been already known by some relevant leading scientists of recent times, to be the most urgent goal required for developing a systematic pre-mapping for a systematic “defense of Earth.”
The most challenging threat to such early and later achievements in such directions, is presented to mankind, not by the notion of travel defined by systems connecting us to Mars, but in respect to the forced collapse of a scientific technology which is already represented by the corrupting influence of the so-called “Green Disease” represented by a reduction of the human population which already threatens a case for the vulnerability of mankind’s scientific potentials under the regime of human-population exterminations, exterminations which are currently prescribed by the British monarchy, and are spreading like a hyperactive cancer, or like the role of the wooden horse at Troy, into the other regions of our planet.
On this account, the present threat of the mass-exterminations which are now recommended so forcefully by Her Britannic Majesty’s pro-genocidal programs, now threatens, and that rather immediately, the extinction of our human species. No known species has been known to be enabled to survive the rigors of a reversal of all living species’ dependency on the indispensable increase of the energy-flux density required for the existence of all living species.
The typical examples of this threat to our human species, are to be located in the systemically absurd presumption that the laws of the universe might be adduced from simply those shadows cast for us as being merely sense-perceptions. It is the universe which casts the shadows in some mere part, which impresses the virtual footprints of sense-perception, if not the foot itself.
The beginning of actual science, is, therefore, to be located in the most essential of the distinctions of mankind from all other known species of living creatures: mankind’s specifically voluntary reliance on the ordering principle of successively higher energy-flux densities in the use of the equivalents of fire. A kindred functional characteristic is expressed in all successful modes of life: any species which develops in an “undirection” of successively lower equivalents in the standard for what are “characteristically,” successively lower orders of “fire,” as Her Majesty the Queen of England has specified, is an inherently self-endangered species of any system of mixed kinds so measured in terms of lowered mean levels of relative energy-flux-density.
In the special case of our human species, we soar toward the highest of the yet-conceived ontological levels of energy-flux density, as from chemical fuels, to nuclear, thence to thermonuclear, and thence to matter-antimatter standards, each and all of which energy-flux densities, are to be controlled by the willful intervention of mankind.
The case of Mars, as to be reconsidered from the standards required for the defense of Earth against asteroids and, hopefully, comets, already conveys a notion of the distinction of our human species of being implicitly an immortal species, if not actually as biologically immortal individual persons, in contrast to other qualities of presently knowable cases of forms of life.
This specific point of distinction of our human species, is complemented by another crucial distinction. Mankind is the only species presently known to us, which is potentially immortal as a species of ever-higher qualities of development within the universe, as, for example, the form of expression of immortality presented in I Corinthians 13. Or, to restate the same essential point, mankind is the only presently known type of living species, for our present experience, which is potentially capable of outliving, as a species, our essentially all-too-mortal, local Sun.
This ostensibly unique characteristic of our human species, is distinguished by its natural powers of qualitative creativity expressed in and of itself. The qualitative evolution inherent as a specifically natural quality of the human species-type itself, prescribes an infectious quality of the human mind as such, rather than the inherently mortal mere brain—a conception already touched upon in the definition of the human mind by Wolfgang Köhler and his senior Max Planck. It is the human mind, in its role as intrinsically a creatively evolutionary species, which encompasses and enriches the self-evolution of our human species. The mortal body wears out, or expires by other means; the effect of human progress through creativity, is an immortal quality of our species, in essential fact.