History is made by the victor, and so is science. This is the story of those who set out to create knowledge and those who want to believe in it. It is the story of the Big Bang, of dark matter, of alternative explanatory models and the arrogance of the respective elites to simulate the world as they would like to see it. It’s the story of us.

It’s also the story of a spice rack in a dragon house kitchen. And it is the story of cooking and eating as it is a story of thinking and acting. Insight liberates, especially from belief in knowledge.

In the fall of 1609, Galileo made the mistake of pointing his newly developed telescope at the sky. He had always been a critic of Aristotle and what he saw made him doubt again. The observation of nature could not be brought into harmony with the worldview of that time, the earth at the center of the then known universe was untenable.

Around 1929 Hubble published his first scientific paper on the relation of redshift and distance between galaxies. For his famous diagram, he chose the speed as the scale on the Y-axis. Einstein stopped his work on the cosmological constant. He called his assumption that the universe is static his “biggest mistake”.

In 1924, Louis de Broglie presented his research thesis, in which he proposed electrons have properties of both waves and particles. As a consequence he rearranged the terms of the Plank-Einstein relation to apply to all types of matter.

More than 20 years later David Bohm renewed the evidence for de Broglies thesis, known as DBB theory.

We consider this to be youthful deviationism. If we can’t refute Bohm we have to agree to ignore him.

Robert Oppenheimer

What do Galileo, Hubble, de Broglie and Bohm have in common and what can we learn from them in times of pandemic?

What most people will experience in 2021 has been prepared well in advance. Gaining sovereignty over the definition of a pandemic, along with the privatization of public tasks in the health care system, paved the way for the new power elite to enter the GREAT RESET. What is meant is less the smoke candle from Davos than the adjustment of global flows of money and goods to the new conditions. And these new conditions result from the dictates of the power elites and their simulations. This is intended to give the phrase “We have good reason to believe that …” is given sufficient evidence. Maintaining and expanding the power structure was and remains the priority of the elite. The call to science as a neutral and thus objective witness turns into a comedy. Whoever orders the desired result in research with a subsidy gets what he orders. So it is helpful that capitalist research produces easily manipulable protagonists who tie their reputation to theses once they have been implemented.

Galileo has been placed under house arrest for the rest of his life, a tried and tested solution to keep the public track free for the elites to enable them to achieve their goals. Hubble was not able to get used to his own thesis of interpreting the redshift as an expression of the escape speed of galaxies. The reputation struggling Einstein gave up his static view of the universe very quickly to stay inside the mainstream. Oppenheimer’s statement about Bohm exposes the institution of science as a circus maximus, in which bread and games are distributed like budgets and honors. And thumbs up when the ruling elite thinks so.

Anyone who sits in the audience and believes that everything is going well here is more than naive, he is safe in the mainstream and is supervised in thinking.

In all cases, turning to nature observation leads to frictions with the narrative. This narrative is not designed to explain the world, but to maintain or establish the order desired by the elites. Friction becomes a danger, censorship the means of choice and distance from the factual is to be measured in cosmological units of distance.
Scientists worried about their reputation become – in their bigotry – complicit, and all means are right: whose bread I eat, whose song I sing. Simulations are invented and adjusted until they bring the result of what was ordered. My ancestors believed what came from the pulpit, my grandfathers what was written in the newspaper, my father what was seen on TV, and my brothers what was published in Wikipedia and what Google showed as a search result and in general what the AI now outputs as a result.

The fictitious narrative is stabilized by adding more and more theses. In the end, you need quasars, dark matter and constants of nature, all of which only conceal what friction remains in the face of nature, which you can observe, but which you don’t have to and shouldn’t if you want to stay in the mainstream.
I don’t know whether hydrogen is baked into helium in a thermodynamic process inside the sun and released protons find their way into my observing eye or whether our sun works off the potential differences of the environment in a long glow like an Elms fire. But I remember that simple descriptions gain an advantage as long as they cannot be refuted, but only if they correlate with the established mainstream. Scientific progress can be measured well in the unit GENERATION. Whenever a generation of researchers dies out, there is always room for new ideas. Bad luck is for those who do not survive their PhD supervisor long enough. Wise is the one who looks for the oldest possible doctoral supervisor.

Biological weapons are conceived, developed and used. Propaganda is a cost-effective, efficient and continually used means of the elite. Anyone who now makes a connection between these two statements is considered a conspiracy theorist. He should be placed under house arrest, no bread and no games.

What is the basis of this human tragedy that continues to lead us astray?

Humans have always tried to save energy. This was well advised in the savannah. The tiger was close, everybody had to run faster when it mattered, not faster than the tiger, but faster than the neighbor.

Thinking costs energy. The externalization of thought is the means of choice. What has already been researched does not have to be researched again, what has already been proven does not have to be proven again. Scientific reputation certifies the implementation of the thesis, not its development and above all not its repeated verification.
In this way, all science becomes a belief system, and those who contradict risk a war of faith. The crusade can easily become the wrong way. And an event is required that questions everything and allows you to start all over again.

A master who demands the adoption of his own theses educates disciples, but not new masters.

Juan Petry

Religion and science are two sides of the same coin. This coin is not the bread. But that is exactly what is confused in the game.

The science that emerged under the Moors and their turn to nature observation was a declaration of war for the rulers and questioned the divine order, the derivation of which was the secular, as the lords liked.
The church could not stand idly by the degradation of the earth (as a place created by God) to a satellite of the sun. Whoever so fundamentally questions what has been considered true for centuries must be a heretic before the Lord.
The naive look through the telescope underestimates the impact of the publication of the observation. In the age of the bomb it had to be the atom, and that’s how I learned that it is the atom that releases the sun’s energy. The alternate truth wasn’t in the textbooks. Teachers who preach the truth don’t need a book of lies.

So I would have wished for a master in school who would motivate me to replace yesterday’s lie with tomorrow’s better lie, knowing that it would be a lie again.

Winners write history. Unfortunately, this always applies. Whoever goes into battle creates collateral damage, and that always creates suffering. Whoever sees in his victory the confirmation of the correctness of his thesis falls victim to hubris. So there must be reasons for the correctness of one’s own actions. The sacrifice is to be made, usually by the loser. And there is no alternative and regret is to be limited.

38 years ago we put a camping gas stove on an old wooden trestle to cook 10 kg of potatoes for the first helpers. A bucket of water next to it, a box of spices, that was the first kitchen in the CASAdelDRAGON.

After that we built many kitchens, some in connection with the casa and its visitors. The kitchen, as the central meeting place in the house, becomes a stage for planning, preparing and eating and for dialogue, embedded in the peace of the common meal.

There are many places with tile mosaics in the house of the dragon. In the large kitchen, the celtic knot dominates over the stove. Now, after 38 years, a shelf for spices has been added on its left side.

The big and small stories of the CASA and its residents are hidden in it. Old tiles from France are used and are reminiscent of friendships that have lasted for two generations. A scallop resembles the path that also leads through this village in eastern Spain and a New Year’s Eve meal in the Pyrinees many years ago.

Even the choice of spices is the history of the chefs through all ages and thus part of the history of this house.

Elita, Sing-Yang, Fadeela, Mariella, Bärbel and Martin, Etienne and many others have left their mark on history.

What can you learn from this kitchen? What can be a healthy connection between what is happening on the stove and in the world? You are what you eat!

The many visitors brought their recipes and preferences with them, they left us memories and tastes.

But we have to cook for ourselves, again and again, and think anew, think for ourselves. If we externalize the food we end up with fast food, if we externalize the thinking we end up in the black hole of knowledge, waiting for the next Big Bang.