You Don’t Know Biochemistry, Influence Can Be A Form of Hatred and America Has A Beautiful Death Up Ahead

In 2014, I have traveled; I have met with CEOs; I have shaken hands with those who shake hands with investors; and I have hired people. Let 2015 be the year I meet with those who actually write the checks.

Throughout the year (2014), I have made several references to America’s position and how it’s contrasted against other States (that’s right, States…not “countries”) in terms of education, economic [instability], healthcare, grasps of basic concepts, etc., and, like it can be so easily pre-determined, nobody is listening. Now, I’m no beacon of absolute truth, but a lot of people in the “scientific community” (snicker) have been suffering aneurysms ever since I began to surface–and the only reason why is because the scientific principles, by which I stand on, are diametrically opposed to their “scientific principles” (snicker). The scientific principles, by which I was taught from a child until now; the scientific principles, by which I was raised on–are the causalities that encourage me to draw questions as to the subject matter, events, evidence or what have you, that are presented. Case in point, the death of Eric Garner.

An overwhelming majority of you reading this do not have the proper education nor any impulse to pick up a book on biochemistry, so this is going to go over the heads of many. But unlike your Liberal union teachers, I will actually explain to you why race is real. Race is very real. There’s a whole lot more to race than just mere differences in one’s skin pigmentation and physical appearance. You also have to factor-in physiological and biochemical/hormonal differences as well. I find it extremely ironic that despite the fact that more working-age Americans have a college degree than the entire population of the United Kingdom, yet no one has asked the simple question:

“Why is it that the choke-hold that was thrown on Eric Garner illegal?”

Since most money on “research” (snicker) is wasted on HIV/AIDS, breast cancer, lung cancer, ALS and whatnot, we can only theorize as to the effects of the choke-hold:

  1. you compress both arteries in the neck
  2. the compression restricts the flow of blood to the brain
  3. that restricted flow of blood to the brain reduces oxygen flow to the brain
  4. the result is a loss of consciousness in order to preserve life or reduce further damage
  5. dilation of the arteries in the neck results in consciousness being regained

Understand that this is how it works for the Caucasoid and Mongoloid races and for several groups of the Aboriginoid race, but that’s not how it works for the Negroid race. When this choke-hold [that was placed on Eric Garner] is used on a Black man, Black woman or Black child, they die.

Perhaps, now you can understand why this choke-hold was banned by police departments, other law enforcement agencies and private security companies. It was banned because the irrefutable evidence proves that thousands of Blacks have died at the hands (literally) of someone that used the choke-hold on them. Why? Answer: No one knows. One can only theorize that the cause could quite possibly be hormonal. In efforts of differentiation, in Whites and Asians specifically, when they are released from the choke-hold the hypothalamus and the amgydala flood the body with hormones, one in particular–adrenaline–which in turn dilates the arteries and blood vessels, increasing oxygenation and the flow of nutrients [in the blood]. Yet, that does not happen in Blacks and I would also say in certain Aboriginoid groups–specifically those of the Americas, Africa, Asia and also Oceania. Why is that? Answer: I don’t know. Why do I not know? Answer: Ask your beloved Liberals. They would rather spend the limited amount of research money that’s available (you know, capital is fixed, finite and limited) on HIV/AIDS than on Negroid biochemistry.

Rather than wait for others to do what needs to be done, the HL team has already started, but it’s going to cost no less than $150,000,000 USD in order to commence such a grand undertaking. We call it PIR. Now, of course we have to deal with the naysayers but that’s such a simple task. See, people need to realize how careful they need to be before making typical generalizations the likes of “no one will pay you to do…”, or “I don’t know anyone that…”. It’s easy to crush the hopes of people that make those kinds of statements. Ambitious people don’t cling to hope and therefore, they make statements that are well-constructed because they’re designed to motivate those individuals–and it keeps them disciplined. With that said, I’m motivated to obtain investment money for HL because I’ll have more respect for the United States of America if it can evolve into a country with more mathematicians, engineers and scientists than it becoming a country cluttered with entertainers, or even worse, incompetent red-headed lawyers.

I assume, the more you know, the more confused you will be. Once you master one level, you’ll get bumped up to another level and another level until you reach your breaking point–and then you die. This is the method behind purposeful research. The essence of business is not failure; the essence of research is failure. Understand this one basic behind research (purposeful and non-purposeful): if it was likely that the research would be immediately useful then some private company would pay money to get it done. This is the reason why PIR is being developed by HL and not in an academic environment. Most academic research is doomed to failure because anything that isn’t doomed would be done by somebody else, specifically by a company that has the money to do so. One reason why a lot of companies fail with the projects they engage in is because a lot of projects end up cancelled the very moment it looks as if they’ll be useless–and that is not a good thing. If an R&D project of an industrial company ends up failing, you shouldn’t be shocked to find the project shifted to the academic world. Additionally, once you reach that point, the funding now gets redirected towards something else–also, you have to factor-in whether or not the research is worthwhile. Breast cancer research–is it worthwhile? If you were to ask me, the answer would be “No!”. Why? Answer: Breast cancer is a naturally-occurring cancer. You, as a clinical researcher, your approach to X (the cancer) is to find or develop the method or procedure (X) that will inevitably result as the cure for breast cancer (Z). So, we have the universal, scientific truth in the form of the equation, X + Y = Z. If you come up with some kind of research that says “we can do X to save lives, but rules X, Y and Z won’t allow us to do it”, that’s an interesting fact that you can hand off to the lawyers and let them work it out.

Here are the hard-hitting (nh @ “hard-hitting”) questions:

  1. Do you think the world would be better off if your lab got shut down? This is an important question because the very millisecond you mention “waste” and “science”, the politicians will come out with guns blazing, ready to shut it down. If your lab is doing ethically questionable things (i.e., the research isn’t something that’s directly beneficial, etc.), they’re going to cut X, period. It’s never, “let’s spend less money on X so we can spend more money on Y”; it’s always, “let’s cut X”.
  2. What are the terms of your funding? If the mandate is to study breast cancer, lung cancer, allergies, etc., then you must study X.
  3. Are the limitations scientific or are they legal and/or political? If someone asks for several billion dollars to develop another means to move the goal-posts back even further in molecular dynamics “research”, then that’s scientifically stupid and there are people who are comfortable in killing that. However, if the limitations are legal, political or sociological and not a matter of science, then that’s a totally different issue. The laws of physics are not going to change, but laws of Congress can and will change.

If you had a relative with major medical conditions, you’re going to have a very strong interest in screaming in peoples’ faces to spend billions of dollars for a measly 0.015% probability of having said relative live another six months. So, if some Congressman shows up at the hospital and says to you, “I’m sorry, but we are not going to fund the research that could possibly lead to that 0.0015% chance of your aunt making it to Christmas…”, then you’re not going to vote for them.

Decisions about what kind of research that should be done are not made “rationally”, in the ordinary sense of the word. People basically, are irrational–and that benefits specific aspects of research a la biotech. People are terrified of dying. If you spend hundreds of billions of dollars on 20,000 different things and one of those things turns out to be something directly beneficial to people suffering from complications from a specific disease, they’re not going to care about the other 19,999 things that didn’t produce squat.

Referring back to the $150,000,000 USD I had mentioned earlier, for a scientific R&D project the likes of PIR, it’s paltry in comparison to the amount of money that goes towards HIV/AIDS research, however, the similarities in terms of necessity is there. In reference to biochemistry, the complexity is overwhelming, which leads to lots of money being spent on research. Perhaps, $150,000,000 USD seems like a lot of money to most, but then again, most people aren’t researchers and haven’t the slightest clue as to what exactly is research. To give you a figure, anything less than $1 billion USD is pocket change, and that’s not a huge sum of money. Oil and mining companies routinely spend billions on earth-based mining. A deep-sea oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico has a total investment in the billions of dollars. PIR research will involve people, but I’m not sure, as of this moment, as to what extent the research will involve people, aside from implementation trials. Research efforts tend to generate lobbying groups, so it takes a while to change direction, if necessary. Here’s something else that I’ve come across since the previous blog post: when you’re dealing with investors, it’s a very bad idea to say that “we shouldn’t do X”. It should be phrased, “we should be doing Y”.

There are only a few ways to move capital between those who hold it and those who don’t–and without making any contribution to market efficiency, debt will be expensive and equity will become scarce. With that said, allow me to speak a little on the concurrent movement, #BlackLivesMatter. This movement will be short-lived because its “leaders” (snicker) do not comprehend where the term, “work hard and you’ll be rewarded” comes from. One of the reasons why the power elite is the power elite is because it’s in the interest of the power elite to keep people working because people working in factories and office cubicles aren’t going to riot or lead demonstrations. Those people “protesting” (snicker), do they work? I’m sure they have to, especially if they have children to feed and support. With that in mind, it would make sense for the “homeless” (snicker) to participate in demonstrations, however, their cause would be a world-of-a-difference from #BlackLivesMatter–and the “homeless” (snicker) are a menagerie of race and ethnicity, and I guarantee their tag would read #OurStomachsMatter. I guess, instead of getting the city council members [that you all willingly elected in] to implement civilian control over various police precincts, you’ll be holding signs and “protesting” (snicker) ad infinitum. That would be the disadvantage of being in an environment in which people around you can and will screw you over, if you let them, therefore, in that particular environment, it would beneficial to know exactly what your weaknesses are and induce damage control over yourself. That’s important. Expressing the need for acceptance (i.e., social approval) is one of your more outstanding weaknesses. Needs are subjective and, for the most part, extremely psychological. As immoral as they are, this is where you have to respect the salesmen, i.e., people engaged in marketing. They are very clever. If you hit someone in the right pressure points, their money will begin to come out from their wallets. Just look at how mutual funds are “sold”. A well-seasoned salesman convinces you to give them their money, they invest your money in a mutual fund or some retirement account option that will make ~10%. By the way, they’ll keep 2% out of that 10%, even if the stock goes down (this is in the fine print).

Perhaps, that would be seen as a bad example, however, you should look at current events with the objective of seeking out the hidden messages that are deliberately being kept from you. A good example of this perspective would be looking at some of the movies that are being released this “holiday season” (snicker) in a different way, such as The Theory of Everything and The Imitation Game. The two flicks share the common nature of propelling what seems to be, at what meets the eye, white male dominance to the forefront of humanity–as well as human history. I can simplify this and simultaneously draw the distinctive contrast between concurrent events and what the [American] future may hold. That contrast lies between two particular parties: those who have constructed the means by which power can be implemented; and those whom are victimized by that power. It is a specific power; and that specific power is influence. The two aforementioned movies–one of them about Stephen Hawking, and the other about the life of Alan Turing–exude influence because they exemplify white male dominance in the form of triumph, overcoming obstacles, individualizing themselves, obtaining achievements and a self-styled persona. This is power manufactured as influence by the machine known as Hollywood. What better way to influence the masses with the falsehood of white male dominance disguised as “success”, disguised as “overcoming obstacles”, disguised as “triumph” or what have you, and, at the same time, you as a Black man, or a Black woman, are experiencing peril–you’re experiencing injustice. Somebody has their foot on your neck and all you can think to do is “protest” (snicker). That’s you. Meanwhile, the machine known as Hollywood churns out films that depicts your white male counterparts as the “heroes”; they’re the symbols of success–at the very least, their definition of success–while you’re out-and-about, lost, making desultory attempts to cause change without any sound objective or purpose. You’re a target for manipulation; you’re a victim of domineering influence that has succeeded in working against you.


Now, if it’s not within your heart-of-hearts for the world to view you as a Black man or a Black woman victimized by the power of influence, how do you plan to alter how the world interprets you and your way of reacting/responding to the injustices imposed upon you?

Maybe, I’m just talking to a wall since it’s beyond predictable as to how Black folks will respond to the question posed to them, and I can say that because most Blacks are afraid of being seen in a manner that’s purportedly “weak” to them–and that’s to be seen as intelligent. You have to decide which option is the better choice: be intelligent; or get shot over some shoes. That’s a puzzling choice for some of you.

For the rest of you out there, I want you to ponder on this: on September 12th, 1962, then-President Kennedy made his famous “moon speech”, but if you read the “entire” speech, you’ll notice that space was item #9 and the famous quote, “I believe that this nation…”, was taken out of context. Putting it back in context, it probably would’ve read: “I think that we should go to the moon, but we need to talk about this, and if we decide not to, then let’s give up right now rather go half-way.”

That quote can be applied to so many different aspects that affect people, I find it quite remarkably disheartening that folks haven’t taken into consideration how much it affects them, even when they do not realize it. The moon, in this case, figuratively, represents the goal that you’re trying to achieve; it’s where you’re trying to go (or, since this is the 21st century, we can say Mars), but you’re missing out on your participation in the requisite evolution (moving into the 5th-Level Economy) that will, in turn, permit you to advance towards your goal (as foolish as it is, Mars). A lot of you do not study history, and as a result, you lack any understanding of why things are the way they are.

Suppose I tell you how this universe was formed. Would it change you for the better? Would Black America finally be able to stand on its legs and begin to move forward? Would White America smile uncontrollably and welcome you with open arms? Would you finally be seen as something that’s socially desirable? Would you be beloved by everyone around you?

Answer: No.

A lot of you get caught up in desiring social approval from your white counterparts and go around thinking that if you obtain the proper credentials (e.g., a college degree, etc.) that they’ll think differently of you. Really? Okay, well you do know that there’s an organization that refer to themselves as the National Society of Black Physicists, correct? And, you do know that there’s a [Black] individual that had posed the National Society of Black Physicists with a question pertaining to Hamiltonians and whether or not Hamiltonians can exist in a fixed state, right? And, you’re aware that the National Society of Black Physicists totally ignored this [Black] individual’s query, right? So, what does that say about the so-called “Black Intelligentsia” (snicker)? It tells me that even “educated” (snicker) people–who claim that there aren’t any young people out there with any direction in their lives–can act like total punk, jackass mawfuckas. It makes no sense for someone to model themselves after another person who thinks they’re a better person and yet, can’t prove it.

Tell Neil deGrasse Tyson and Dr. Ben Carson, M.D., I said so.