Responding to a post directed at me, on the electro-herbalism list (which seems to be undergoing a blitz from unrelated subject posts, possibly just more of the clever attacks against alternative health explorers) which started with appreciation for my earlier reference to the wisdom I am reminded of, the wisdom that "we don't see what we are looking at; instead, we see what we are looking for." What do you see in the above response to you?" - - she then went on to ask why that was; also asking about the nature of "truth" and also what other kinds of electroherbalism instruments had I experience with, particularly referencing Bob Beck's early device too. (The late Bob Beck was a PhD biophysicist mostly involved with early struggles against use of use of radio waves to cause illness or injury, or control people's brainwaves without their consent, back in the Cold War days.) Responding to her post - someone I had not heard of before - I seemed to write things possibly worth repeating in my blog here, as copied below.
"Yes, I agree that is a profound wisdom well worth pondering, that we see what we are looking for.
I wonder what it would be like to be able to fully see what one is looking at.
I suspect that would be an overwhelming experience: all that is present but filtered out by our preprocessing system, that selects out that which is deemed significant to the person at the moment. It would be my Asperger's inability to filter out enough data, far worse than it is already for me.
Long ago I read that one's sensory system is delivering a sum of about a million bits per second to the brain, in large part from the visual system. It has to be heavily pre-filtered so our conscious mind will be able to deal with it. This is done by delivering the physical sensory data coming as wrapped in a container formed of an offered "meaning" as derived from possibly related past experiences.
We need to supply significance to what we are experiencing at any given moment. I can see why that is a survival trait: is that a pile of brush over there, or is it a crouching tiger, for example. Is that slightly visible shape in the bush over there possibly a critter that would go well in the stewpot. Is the person approaching me going to be helpful or will I get bonked instead. It is the meaning of what is being perceived, is what provides life or death data, and data in between.
Thus, we learn to "see what we are looking for." Instead of seeing what we are looking at.
However, much of that "meaning" is learned through life experiences. Parroting the meaningfulness that is being spread around in one's supportive group helps carry on that set of traditions, as well as proving group membership. Thus we learn that the folks wearing my team colors are on my team, and the ones wearing that other set of clothing are opponents intent on undoing me and my team. Soldiers that are wearing my kind of uniform are to be obeyed, and soldiers wearing that other kind of uniform are evil monsters to be killed if possible. The clothing becomes the meaning, and the meaning triggers the response. The person under the clothing becomes labeled with the associated meaning and thus the triggered response.
As for "truth" … I think it is a relative thing. Science is ever attempting to shear off the fluff to find increasingly generalized truth observable by all people in all situations and viewpoints.
Yet the original raw data comes from specific perspectives; and since presumably no two things can occupy exactly the same space at the same time, it could be said that any given thing as seen by any two different observers, will always look different, have a different truth for them.
One could take a tennis ball, roll it around between your hands, roll it along the desktop, toss it to a neighbor who does similar things, and then discuss what is a tennis ball: round, a bit bouncy, a fuzzy texture. It also might mean it has potential for being batted around by a tennis racquet, to some people with that kind of prior experience with tennis balls. Thus the two people assign somewhat different meanings, truths about the tennis ball; yet quite likely they are unaware of the different truths between them and the equal validity for each of their truths. As they describe their observations to each other and share physical experiences with the tennis ball, it is likely to increasingly produce a more similar truth between them, on that subject.
A person might ask, does routine use of a Clark zapper significantly help maintain a person's health?
One person, who has actually done that experiment for several years on a usually daily basis, and had in that time period experienced a major reduction in sick time off work and of feeling sick-miserable, might answer that: yes, it did, and it still does.
But a doctor, asked that same question and having no experience whatsoever with a Clark zapper, might declare that it could not possibly help maintain a person's health better than the doctor, with a hypodermic needle in one hand and a scalpel in the other hand, can do… and besides if the zapper could do that, the doctor would lose a lot of income, and that would make it hard to pay off his long and expensive education expenses, an intolerable situation: no, the Clark zapper is quackery, it cannot work because it was not taught in school that it is an acceptable tool for a doctor to use on his patients.
The two people are both speaking truth as it is for them individually. Truth from their viewpoints; both quite different viewpoints. Now, if it were possible to include the description of the detailed associated viewpoint of the person speaking his or her truth (what a huge pile of data that would be ! ) then there might be a way to harmonize the truths so as to find some common truth that might also significantly apply to some third person at another time and place.
For example, the doctor with a hypo in one hand and a scalpel in the other, might be the only way to save the life of a person freshly mangled in a car accident, unconscious and heavily bleeding. A matter of life or death.
Yet also a person suffering a large dirty wound in a situation where no medical help is economically or physically available, might find that a simple flushing the wound out with tap water, taping the pieces of flesh back together with masking tape, and using a Clark zapper powered from a car's cigar lighter 12 volt power outlet, heals rapidly and without pain, swelling or redness; and has fused back together with only the outline of a scar, all in three days, without the doctor. The otherwise major infection might have eventually become fatal; the proper use of the Clark zapper would then have saved a life, much as the doctor did in the prior hypothetical example.
… As for what other devices I have used in my also "modest means" lifestyle, I have bit the financial bullet and bought the programmable zappers sold at the drclark.com site over the years; but, they occasionally are under attack by the authorities and have to get their instruments built overseas, and that source could get cut off by the special interest groups.
Thus, most of my more recent experimentation has been using instruments of my own design and construction, that keep evolving as I learn about it more. My goal is to come up with a design that others could build here in America with surplus parts at low cost, that are essentially able to do the Clark bioresonant frequencies (mostly 100 to 450 KHz) along with the Rife-associated signal sets (0.05 Hz to 10 KHz, usually.) It is a hobby that keeps me entertained in retirement, anyway, and saves me lots of money and misery so far (also has saved the gov't over $6000 in the medicare part B payments I have made but not drawn from, too.) The instruments generally reflect the evolution of my designs, and the current design one includes the long-proven zapper that has a single frequency around 32 KHz with a stiff buffered output from 9 volt source, and has a LED that glows in proportion to the body current from the zapper, providing feedback about the condition of the circuit including oneself. The second part takes audio tracks, recorded as if music but are the sequences of signals such as are found on the electroherbalism site, usually three minutes each, compressed and put on a music player, and fed into the zapper which converts them into zapper-type pulsed-DC waveforms, that then drive the aforementioned special zapper output circuitry including the LED showing body current, throughout the Rife-specturm; it uses square wave recordings for below 100 Hz and the instrument reconstructs the original low frequency from that, as low as one wants to go. The third section is a frequency multiplier, multiplying the frequency being played back by the music player by 100, so it provides an extension on up through the Clark bioresonant frequencies. Then I play the audio tracks (that I had previously chosen for myself and recorded on my computer) while holding the wet-paper covered copper tubing handholds, watch the LED's brightness, and see what, if any, effect it has on myself. The Stenulson stimulation and balancing frequencies are of special interest to me. As well as several parasites in the Clark bioresonant range that are much faster treated than the Rife-spectrum signal sets, and I have found I need to do them about every day, or the glooms start to set in and handicap me - Salmonella typnimurium and Shigella flexneri seem to be my own personal nemesis brain parasites if I don't beat on them daily with the signal sets recorded as audio of 1/100 the Clark bioresonant frequency range of each of them, then multiplied by my instrument to produce the actual bioresonant frequencies; takes over half an hour of my day to run them - although I can two-finger type on keyboard while running them, holding the pipe handholds while doing so.
I think the current programmable zappers sold at drclark.com site are possibly too expensive for those of modest means - in the $600 range even before buying the programs - and also consumes way too much power from 9 volt batteries as compared to their previous model that ran far longer on a pair of AA batteries - but is no longer available, and was built in Italy - although it too was in the $600 range back then. But, is the most versatile of the commercial ones that I have experience with; and some of their program sets are quite effective, I think, such as their one for "headaches" seems to significantly improve my memory, for example, if used every few days.
I have no experience with the instruments that use plasma tubes. I have long thought about building something vaguely resembling the capacitive instrument or inductive-capacitive varieties, but I get lost in the further design complexities I would do with them for better characterization and application, and so has not gotten done. Yet. My current design zapper could pulse a pocket laser am sure; it has current limiting at 4.5 mA - and I hope to do such experiments some day - I have tried it with a common LED and works nicely but physiological effects if any are yet to be explored.
But, I can do only so much; and the disdain I generally get re this effort is no fun either. The part that they especially don't want to hear is about their being sick and miserable and doctor trips and medical expenses - that I did not experience. That does not match with their truth, their group-taught viewpoint.
I buy and give out the $10 SMD 30 KHz zappers now available on ebay, excellently made devices for the money, whenever I can find someone who will pay attention to me long enough for me to hand one to them; I do this at my own expense; I ask for feedback, but the folks generally either won't talk about it; how to use it, as well as how to get functional handholds, is a problem with all that - still, I fantasize it might save someone's life in an emergency, if enough of them are out there, one at the right time and place. There also is one of similar type for $15 on ebay that produces a Rife frequency - 15 Hz, but I have not personally gotten one, since my device will do the 15 Hz easily.
Re Beck's device, long ago I did get a copy of Beck's device's schematic, intending to use my technician skills to freely make some of them to give out to the unfortunate people in need, but I never ran across anyone with the disease, so it never got built and thus never tested. Attending Beck's lectures at the WLE several times, it sounded like the use of that device could have saved enormous pain and suffering of people, including inhibiting the spread of the disease, but the authorities were adamant about blocking that from happening. Tragic, what people do to each other; yes, I know that folks say the world is overpopulated (or at least overpopulated with people not of their own religion or particular family or ethnicity) - am familiar with Malthusian theory and number crunching - yet even in high school when the teacher said that mice reproduce so rapidly that in a few years the whole world would be covered by mice six inches deep - and as far as I could tell, I was the only one who looked down and did not see six inches of mice there covering my feet - or even see one mouse anywhere in sight: there must be more to it all, than that. I also have heard that the more people there are on the planet, the higher the rate of accumulation of knowledge and capability to use it, so a larger population might well be able to solve the big problems that they thereby create, too. It could be a race between expanding population's intelligence, vs the rate of accumulation of trash ruining the air-water-land environment, will the damage be beyond any repair, too many species gone extinct, before people get smart and responsible enough to pull the fat out of the fire, I wonder.
But, tragically it seems that people like to squabble more than work harmoniously to responsibly tend our wonderful home, strange a thing that that is - time will tell if the various alpha-male-wannabe men in their in-bred efforts to be the sole progenitors of future generations, will pull the curtain down on humankind's show when they fall - depending on the resulting mess they make, Mother Nature will anyway eventually produce a new kind of intelligent being to replace us - maybe based on the sturdy cockroach - I hope with much better responsibility than we are demonstrating currently.
In the meantime, I do my best to do my part as best I can with what resources I have, despite the hazing I frequently experience.
I hope this has answered your questions, written from my viewpoint, of course … I can ask of you too: what do you see in the above response to you?
BTW, no reply to this has appeared on the list.
Labels: electroherbalism, wisdom