Spectrum Magazine - 2003
Interview With James McCanney
Return to The Sun-Earth Connection
On July 18, I had the privilege of speaking with physicist
James McCanney again, this time in more detail, about the Sun, the solar
winds, our unusual weather patterns, and his latest book. Remember
that all of his provocative information is noted at his
www.jmccanneyscience.com Internet website.
While a more complete biography for Professor McCanney was presented
as part of the front-page story in our May 2003 issue of The
SPECTRUM, this brief version comes to us from the Coast-To-Coast AM
late-night talk-radio program (hosted by George Noorey) website,
when introducing him as a guest on that program:
Professor James McCanney,
M.S., is a physicist who has spent decades
promoting his theoretical work showing that the Solar System is ever
changing and is electrically active. These theories have been
confirmed with space probe data and prove that there are definite
Earth effects resulting from our Sunís electrical activity. He has
openly opposed NASAís view that outer space is electrically neutral.
McCanney was a faculty member of the Physics and Mathematics
departments of Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. He has researched
theoretical Celestial Mechanics and Plasma Physics (for the layman,
these are the studies of planetary motion and electrified gases in
outer space), and has presented his theories at the Los Alamos
National Laboratories and American Geophysical Union.
With that intro, letís see what Professor McCanney has to say:
Martin: I realize you have a new book out and I would like to talk
to you about that, but before we get into that I would like to talk
to you about the announcement by the World Meteorological
Organization saying that our weather is going crazy, and in all
probability is going to continue to go crazy.
How do the solar winds influence our atmosphere and our weather, and
what is going on with the Sun? Talk as long as you like about the
SOHO, about satellites, about the general publicís
inability to monitor whatís going on, what is NASA afraid of, and
those kinds of things.
I know thatís a VERY loaded question.
McCanney: [Laughter] Thatís a big little question.
I actually had a short, brief note in one of my early comet papers
and I talked about the electrical nature of the Solar System and
what comets were. I had a short, maybe even a one-sentence note
"The effect of the electric fields in outer space on Earthís upper atmosphere and weather should be investigated."
all it said. At the time, I thought there must be something here. We have
jet-streams. I knew there was an energy problem, which means that,
basically, there is not enough energy in the local environment to
cause tornadoes, hurricanes. There is no source of electrical energy
to cause lightning.
In fact, I guess this is the simplest way to put it: If you do an
analysis on solar energy strictly based on visible light that many
people consider as the source of energy for our weather system and
for the heating of the oceans, and ocean currents, and all of that,
there simply is NOT enough energy to do the kinds of things we see.
To begin with, let me go through the standard theories.
The standard theory is that the sunlight comes in and heats up the
ground, and then that energy is lifted up somehow, magically,
causing the jet streams to flow. Thatís totally incorrect. It
violates the first, second, and third laws of thermodynamics to have
an energy source thatís first dissipating and then reconcentrating
into organized energy fields like the jet stream. It, basically,
Also, there is just not enough energy to do that. Take, for example,
hurricanes and tornadoes and the kinds of storms that build-up and
develop into these larger storms. Once again, simple energy
calculations show that, in an average small hurricane, you would
literally have to take the energy from the entire globe for,
probably, a couple of days to feed into that storm to give it enough
energy to cause the storm, which means that the rest of the globe
would go without any energy, just to feed that storm. Clearly,
thatís not happening.
The standard theory for how hurricanes develop now includes salt
content and basically says that hurricanes develop because the cloud
system is absorbing the warm water, evaporates, causing a stirring
form of motion around a low cell, starts to spin, and then this
forms the hurricane. But how can you maintain that low cell when you
have wind rushing into it at 200 miles an hour? Thereís clearly a
Letís take a tornado. They talk about wind sheers in, say, a cold
front and a warm front coming together, and these move by each other
causing the rotating motion that would cause a tornado. Clearly, if
you look at tornadoes, they come DOWN OUT OF THE CLOUDS. They do not
have anything to do with wind sheer, especially down at ground
levels where they are very damaging, where the biggest tornadoes
There are all kinds of physics problems involved in meteorology.
In the formation of the jet stream which gets up to the upper
atmosphere, where weíre dealing with interaction of outer space and
Earth, there are obvious connections with the jet stream and high-and low-pressure cells in the atmosphere, because the jet stream
will wrap around, up and over, and down below high and low cells.
So, there is some association between the high-and low-pressure
cells that are down at the surface of the Earth and the movement of
the jet stream which is up in the upper atmosphere.
We know that there is an
Ionosphere which exists on both the day and
night side of Earth, equally. Itís not different on the night side.
Well, itís a bit different but not extremely different on the night
side as it is on the day side of the Earth. And we have the very
interesting property of the northern and the southern jet streams.
We have three jet streams on planet Earth. The northern tropical
belt or semi-tropical belt flows eastwardly around the Earth. The
southern semi-tropical belt flows eastwardly around the Earth. And
the central equatorial jet stream flows westerly around the Earth.
What causes this counter-rotating set of jet streams? The northern
and southern jet streams snake around and dip down toward the Earth,
and snake wildly - kind of snaking patterns - around the Earth. Whereas
the westward equatorial jet stream moves in a very, very steady,
concentrated stream, westward, right around the equator, sometimes
just a little north of the equator, sometimes a little south.
None of these things make any sense given a Sun which just is
putting out solar light radiation in the form of visible light and
ultraviolet light, and the other forms of light that affect Earth.
The other thing is that most of the light that comes from the
Sun - the ultraviolet, the infrared, the x-rays, everything but the
visible - is pretty much lost in the upper atmosphere. So, the only
thing that really reaches the surface of the Earth is visible light.
And, of course, that turns into infrared heat which the animals use
to see, and the fish under the water. There is a lot of infrared
light that is generated from the visible light coming in. In other
words, things heat up; they give off infrared light, kind-of like an
iron that you iron your clothes with. If you plug it in and heat it
up, and then put it on the table, you will not see the iron at night
with your eyes, but an animal would, because they see in the
infrared. Infrared light is secondary light, secondary transmission,
but the point is, our weather simply could not form, we would have
very bad weather.
Letís take a look at another issue here, and that is cloud
production. How do clouds form? There is a very interesting piece of
equipment in physics; itís called a cloud chamber. You put moisture
in there, and then you put a high electric field along that chamber,
and water droplets form. In fact, they use it. It was one of the
very early forms of detecting subatomic particles. The subatomic
particles would move through the cloud chamber, ionize the water,
and leave a little trace, and therefore you could see these
subatomic particles moving around and spinning in a nearby magnetic
field. Thatís literally called a cloud chamber. But, you would not
form the cloud if you didnít put this extensive electric field
across the cloud chamber. To translate that into our atmosphere,
clouds could form, a water accumulation could occur, but the big
Cumulonimbus, the storm-type clouds and the hurricane-type clouds,
those clouds would not form at all if you did not have some kind of
significant electric field.
So, to start putting all of this information together. Looking at
weather in general through many different aspects, the science that
is taught in meteorology is simply wrong. It could not possibly
explain tornadoes, and cyclonic storms, and thunder coming out of
clouds that have lightning bolts coming out of them.
The standard explanation for lightning, for example, is that there
are thermal currents in a cloud. You can see those thermal currents.
But, that is not the source of lightning. Lightning is an electrical
phenomenon. You could have all of the movement of thermal currents
that you would like, but itís not going to GENERATE an electric
field that is going to then send a lightning bolt down to the
ground. Whereas, with the vertical upward electrical phenomenon
above major storms, there is no mechanism for lightning to leave.
Say it did form by that mechanism. There is no way for this
lightning to then leave that cloud to some place else because the
cloud would be, basically, electrically neutral relative to
So, the lightning and the spikes that we see above the storm system,
and also below the storm system reaching the ground, has to be the
result of some much larger electrical system in the atmosphere.
You put all of this stuff together and you realize that standard
meteorology today is just bogus. It cannot explain anything. Thatís
why weathermen are right 80% of the time. Their models can predict
under normal circumstances.
Letís talk about weather modeling and climate modeling as it is
performed today by meteorologists and related professionals. What
they do is, they take PAST data and they say:
"Today is like a day
that occurred 3 years ago, similar weather patterns, similar wind
Then they do a statistical analysis. This is also the way
they predict where hurricanes will go, by the way. They take this
past data, and then they say: "This is what our computer model
predicts." But, this is why they are wrong on the very violent
storms - because theyíre using past data that has nothing to do with
the SOLAR conditions that exist today, when theyíre trying to
Letís take Hurricane Floyd; it came into Florida. The computer
models said that the storm would approach land and then turn
northward. And, in fact, they were correct in that. But, if certain
other conditions were a little bit different, that would not have
happened, and Floyd would have come into Florida, killing millions
of people, because they didnít give any evacuation notice to
So, they are, basically, using very crude, incorrect models.
[Editorís note: Furthermore, you more aware readers are likely to be
wondering where artificial weather control enters this picture. And,
of course, the answer is that such covert manipulations add yet
another layer of unpredictability for the already befuddled
meteorologists to contend with.]
It turns out that the most important component of weather
forecasting is in the SOLAR electric fields. The solar wind passes
by Earth, that carries the electric field with it; and Iíve
identified 17 of what I call local environmental batteries, or
These are, literally, batteries or capacitors that exist around the
planet Earth and they are built-up by the solar conditions.
The Solar System is dominated by the Sun. I would estimate the Sun
is putting out 100,000 times more electrical energy than it is
putting out physical light energy.
We are very much buffered from this energy because we have a huge
magnetic field, and there are many other conditions in space which
buffer us from this electrical energy which is just pouring by us,
Letís look at a New Moon. The Moon moves in front of Earth, breaks
that electrical flow, and then moves out of the way. It gives us
tremendous bombardment after that Moon moves out of the way, the
first and second day after the New Moon. Thatís the condition that
has been identified as being one of the leading causes of
kicking-off major hurricanes and storms. What it does is: The Moon
is interacting with the solar electric field. Itís that CHANGE which
causes the storms, and causes the environment around Earth to
change, and thus affects Earth weather.
Planetary electrical alignments are another factor. There has been a
lot of misinformation about planetary alignments regarding, say,
earthquakes and all kinds of devastation when the planets line-up.
There was one alignment back in the 1990s where we had, I think, 5
or 6 planets lining-up, and everybody thought the world would come
to an end. People were predicting gravitational effects. They were
ridiculous predictions based on a very poor understanding.
Gravitationally, we are NOT affected by the other planets. What we
are affected by are the electrical alignments that these planets
hold with the Sun. When the planets line-up, there are electrical
connections made which increase the energy flow around Earth. That
can affect us and, in fact, does affect our weather.
Iíve made a lot of
weather predictions based on the electrical
alignments of celestial objects - especially when you throw a comet
in, for example, which is very large, electrically. The electrical
size of a comet is very much larger than its physical size. Thatís
something that standard astronomy and space scientists and
astrophysicists simply donít understand.
In fact, to date, astrophysicists, space scientists, and astronomers
deny that there is anything electrical in outer space at all. They
want to explain everything in terms of gravity and magnetic fields
which, somehow, self-exist out there - which is another quagmire in
modern space physics.
These scientists, many of whom have very poor physics backgrounds,
talk about magnetic effects. Iíll just name off a few:
Io, the small moon of Jupiter, close to the big moon of Jupiter,
carries with it a tremendous electrical current. The astronomers
say: "This is due to the fact that Io is moving in
magnetic field and it causes the 'dynamo effectí, and this causes
the electrical current." When, in fact, itís the OPPOSITE.
The electrical current is part of the electrical current flow
between the Sun and Jupiter, and the small moon is just getting in
the way and carrying the current with it. Thatís creating the
magnetic field. What they donít understand is that these magnetic
fields do not just self-generate. In fact, it goes back to very
fundamental electrical physics, called Maxwellís equations. Itís a
set of four equations that describe the interaction between magnetic
fields and electric fields, and basic electric charges.
magnetic fields do not self-exist. They only exist
when charges move and create magnetic fields. To understand magnetic
fields in outer space, you have to understand that charges have to
move to create those magnetic fields. For charges to move, you need
some sort of battery or capacitor that is sustaining the condition;
in other words, itís there all the time. These charged currents,
then, create the magnetic field, not visa-versa.
Thereís another thing that space scientists and astronomers talk
about, called "magnetic reconnection", where the magnetic field
lines go around and then reconnect. Itís as if they float out into
the middle of nowhere and then came back and reconnect into a
particular region. What they donít realize is that this is simply a
SECONDARY effect. The more fundamental thing you have to look at is:
what are the electric fields that are causing the electrical
current, that are causing the magnetic field? Itís that progression.
They are looking backwards, and they never get to the electric
fields, or the electrical currents, because they donít understand
the fundamental concepts of Maxwellís equations.
These modern concepts of "magnetic reconnection" include a thing
called "solar pick-up ions". Another fallacy is - itís actually an
impossibility - astronomers have been trying to explain why the solar
wind particles accelerate once theyíve left the Sun. Throughout an
interplanetary stage theyíre moving along, and all of a sudden they
see these tremendous accelerations in the solar wind particles. And
so, they theorize that the magnetic field is sweeping out and it
picks up these ions and sweeps them
out by some kind of magnetic acceleration. There, again: in
fundamental physics the only thing a magnetic field can do to a
charged particle is change its direction; it cannot add energy. So,
once again, the fundamental physics that these scientists have
created, based on magnetic fields, is fundamentally flawed.
This leads all the way back to
meteorology, where scientists talk
about the magnetic storms on the Sun, and what causes solar flaring.
They talk about "magnetic bubbles" in the Sun that burst, and the
energy comes bursting out in these streamers of charged particles.
Totally false! A magnetic field, of itself, cannot impart the energy
to a charged particle. It can only change its direction of motion,
once again, going right back to Maxwellís equations.
The reason Iím going through all of this is because it would be
impossible for these scientists to come to any kind of correct
conclusion when they donít understand the fundamental processes at
work in the Solar System. The real fundamental processes come back
to the Sun, which is putting out an excess current of protons,
thusly causing a huge capacitor. That is the electrical
driving-force of the entire Solar System.
What Iím saying is: I realized this in my early study of the
System back in 1979, when I was observing these phenomena and
theorizing that comets were not dirty snowballs and that the solar
environment has to have an electric field, a SUSTAINED electric
There is something about electric fields in outer space. They cannot
exist for very long by themselves, because currents would quickly
move and cancel them. So, there has to be an ongoing source of
energy to continue to resupply this battery or capacitor. That turns
out to be the fusion of the Sun.
Now, that leads back to the condition of the Sun. If the Sun had
fusion in its core, as these astronomers theorize, then thereís no
way to get a charged differential up to the surface, and therefore
out into the Solar System. So, now weíre talking about the solar
energy source - fusion.
Literally, every basic theory that modern astronomers use turns out
to be incorrect. They are fundamentally flawed. There is no way that
you can translate this into meteorology and come up with any kind of
correct prediction or answers because they donít understand the very
fundamental, basic energy source in the Solar System, and that is:
the Sunís fusion is not in its core, itís at the surface of the Sun,
up at the upper atmosphere.
One of the fundamental properties of fusion is that it separates
charge and the protons go out. Itís a rather complicated situation
but, basically, the Sun is like a "super atom". It has a corona of
very high-energy electrons which are in orbit, literally at very
high velocities, around the central, positively charged core of the
Sun. So, you have the super-atom state. When the proton streamers
come off of the Sun, they are accelerated through the corona, which
is NEGATIVELY charged; then they come blasting out. This is the
cause of solar flaring. In fact, you would not even have solar
flaring with the solar core fusion model, where fusion is IN the
In fact, before
SOHO and these solar satellites were up in orbit,
the standard concept of the Sun was that it was just a very smooth,
glowing, orange ball. Thatís what would be predicted if you had the
core model of fusion IN the Sun.
When they got up there, all of the data contradicted that model, yet
they kept the model, which is one of the big problems in astronomy.
They continue to use models that are outdated, even though all this
new data tells you, directly, that the model could not possibly be
true. So, decade after decade these scientists are flying around the
world, going to conferences, spouting totally incorrect physics.
Their papers are being published because itís the thing to do, the
mode to follow, and thereís no progress being made. NASA now has
10-year programs in place; one is called "The Sun-Earth Connection".
They are just beginning to ask some of the very fundamental
questions that I already had answered back in 1979 on how the solar
wind translates into energy in the Solar System.
Back to the whole idea of weather. To understand Earth weather, you
first have to understand that the Sun fusion is not in the core;
itís up at the surface of the Sun. That translates into tremendous
electrical energy in the Solar System. The planets and the comets
and the moons of the Solar System all are discharging this battery
or capacitor thatís built-up around the Sun. In the process of
discharging this capacitor, the electrical energy is blowing through
the Solar System all the time and is, basically, the cause of our
Now, a good example of a hurricane, that according to standard
theory could not exist, is one that was observed on Mars. Mars has
no oceans, no water. But, a huge hurricane, large enough to be
visible from Earth, was seen on
Mars and it lasted for days, moving
around the Martian atmosphere. This was a major hurricane. So,
obviously, the theory that warm water is the cause of hurricanes
could not possibly be true, and also for all the other reasons that
Iíve stated. Thatís just one counter-example.
Scientists just totally ignore those contradictory examples because
theyíre stuck on their theoretical structure that, unfortunately, is
totally wrong. But, they are the people who have the press. They
have the journal publications, the grants, the whole system of
And itís all locked-up on these people, many of them who are quite
old. The young guys have to buy into this or they donít get their
PhD, get funded, and so on. Itís a system that is terribly troubled
and in big trouble, but it goes on because the funding is locked in
In fact, this year, interestingly enough, the National Science
Foundation and most of the congressional budgets for science
doubled. Somebody asked me if I thought that would help improve
science. I said: "No. Youíll just get twice as much of the same."
And thatís really what will happen. In fact, it will help lock-in
these theories even more, because now the fundamental driving force
in science, which is money and funding, is even greater, and thatís
the control mechanism that is keeping science in a big rut.
So, that is all related to how weather gets predicted and analyzed.
The fundamental situation with weather, however, is that the main
driving force of our major weather systems, including our winds, is
the electrical component of the Sun. Without that, within a day or
two, Earth would turn into a cold nothing. And literally, within a
week, our atmosphere would freeze and fall down to the ground as
crystals. Itís just incredible the amount of energy that comes from
When people talk about climate or long-range trends, I donít believe
any of that. I never believed the "Greenhouse Effect", for example,
because very simply, our daily allotment of energy is coming
directly from the Sun. A good way to understand this is:
When we are in daytime, we are receiving from the Sun, directly.
Then, as the Earth spins around and you go into nighttime, youíll
probably drop an average of 20-30 degrees between day and night
temperatures. And, say that as you came around again, the Sun wasnít
there the next day; it just shut-off for some reason. Now you would
continue to drop 10, 20, 30 degrees per day - actually, per half day,
in fact. And within a very few short days, the entire Earth would
just be frozen and we would continue to go into a deep freeze, very
So, our Sun, our climate, literally
everything on Earth is very
intricately related to the solar output on a DAILY basis. This is
not years, or centuries, or anything else. Itís on a daily basis.
The other thing that Iíve discovered about weather is that not only
is the energy for these storms coming in from outside the planet,
but in many cases water is building-up in these storms from outside
the planet, also. This occurs when we, basically, electrically
attach, just like a comet does, to the solar environment, and the
hydrogen and oxygen that are in our local environment in outer space
combine and they come pouring in.
Now, you can see a storm develop, coming across, say, the Rocky
Mountains into the mid-Western states or from the Pacific Coast
into, say, Oklahoma and that region, and you can see these storms
building up. The satellites are looking down, and the satellites
show how much moisture is in the air. You can look directly at the
infrared and at the components of the satellites that look at just
water, and you can see that, as those storms move in to the center
part of the North American continent, water is being added to that
You have to ask yourself: "Where is that water coming from?" It
wasnít there when this storm came off the coast. In many cases there
was no storm coming off the coast. The storm actually developed in
the middle of the country.
I just saw last night an example
- this was Hurricane Claudette - which
was moving-in off the Gulf Coast into Texas. Just as it reached
shore, I snapped a picture of the National Weather radar, and also
the water content in this storm. At the same time, there was a
weather system moving through the midwestern states - specifically,
Illinois and Indiana and Michigan. And in the same time that
Claudette, the hurricane, moved-in off the Gulf, the storm in the
Midwest gained, probably, three times as much energy and three times
as much water as the hurricane. And all the focus (and the news) was
on the hurricane.
Iím just pointing out that this hurricane was going over the ocean,
picking-up water, yet a storm in the Midwest in the United States,
in the same amount of time, and with no source from any ocean or
body of water, picked-up three times the amount of water in that
storm as the hurricane, which had been passing over the ocean for
Another point here is that water is, literally, coming down from
above to drive these storms because there is simply not enough water
in the atmosphere to drive some of these storms.
Ask, then: Wouldnít we be flooding? Wouldnít this be a huge build-up
in the ocean levels?
The answer is: Very quickly, much of this water moves in a
hydrological cycle. Thereís a three-cycle motion in Earthís
atmosphere that very quickly takes most of this water up to the
North Pole and down to the South Pole, where it builds up very
Hereís an example: After World War II there was a prop plane with
five fighter pilots that had to make an emergency landing up at the
North Pole. And they left them there. One of the people who was a
pilot of one of those fighter planes said, I believe it was 10-15
years later, whatever it was, they got some money together and they
were going to go up and salvage those airplanes. When they got to
the site, the planes were nowhere to be found. They started digging.
The planes were 200 feet under the ice pack. They had just been
sitting there, and thatís just in a short, say, 10-year period,
which shows that a couple of feet per year of water is building
up - or, possibly as much as 20 feet per year of ice is building up.
So, thatís where the water is going on a continual basis from the
influx of water into the atmosphere.
You have to understand, all of these components are not understood
or recognized in modern meteorology. But, thatís kind-of an overview
of where modern meteorology is, of current astronomical theories,
and of my view of weather.
Now, letís take the announcement this past March from the World
Meteorological Organization. They made the statement that weather is
One thing that Iíve been almost preaching for years now is that the
Sunís energy is peaking, and itís NOT going down. NASA keeps putting
out news releases saying: "The Sun has peaked; itís finally going
down to solar minimum." The fact is that, in the year 2000, the
solar maximum year, the Sun peaked AND IT NEVER WENT DOWN IN ENERGY.
What Iím talking about is the electrical energy component of the
Sun. We are at a state now where the Sun is putting out tremendous,
tremendous amounts of energy, over and above a normal solar maximum.
The other thing that I noticed was that comets were coming in from
the southern celestial hemisphere. In other words, our south, if you
look out the south end of Earth, from that direction, you would see
comets coming in, just raining into the Sun. There were big ones,
almost one per day. I was seeing these courtesy of the SOHO
satellite images. Iím convinced thatís why they had to
down, because it was just becoming too obvious.
In fact, the big comet
NEAT-V1 that came in. We just saw some very
big comets coming in from the south.
My interpretation of this is that
there is a very large object which
has broken into the outer reaches of the Solar System, into the
solar capacitor, probably way out beyond, many Pluto distances out,
but in the southerly direction, at the bottom of the Solar System,
so to speak, and is moving in and bringing with it an entire
entourage of smaller objects, and this object is moving in.
There are a number of reasons to believe this, besides just being
the rain of comets coming in from the south. One is that the U.S.
and the Vatican and many other groups have put a lot of money
recently into large observatories at the South Pole,
and none at the
North Pole. There is something very interesting going on in the
southern skies. Itís very difficult to see anything down there,
unless youíre near the South Pole, just because the majority of
Earthís land mass above sea water is in the Northern Hemisphere.
There is very little land in the Southern Hemisphere, especially as
you get down toward the South Pole. There are no good astronomical
viewing locations down there. The only good place is at the South
Pole, and most of us donít have the ability to staff and build
astronomical observatories at the South Pole.
At any rate, there is something very interesting going on in the
southern skies and nobody is talking about it. I believe that is one
of the main things that is driving our weather. Something is
influencing the solar capacitor, which then is interacting with the Sun and giving us this incredible weather we have been
witnessing here. And itís just beginning to show itís ugly head. I
think itís going to get a lot worse before it gets a lot better.
I think everybody will agree, weíre having very unusual weather, all
the way back into the 1990s. We had typhoons back in the í90s, in
the old Hale-Bopp days, that had 300+ mile-per-hour winds. It also
was at the same time when China and Scandinavia, those two regions
of the Earth, had 250 mile-an-hour straight-line winds that came
down to the surface of the Earth. In other words, the jet stream
came down and touched the planetary surface and did tremendous
amounts of damage. This is all the result of very unusual electric
field situations around the Earth.
Thatís just kind of a summary where the weather is today. Weíre just
beginning to see the things that are making people kind of stand-up
and really take notice.
Martin: The other day, NASA announced the "discovery" of
McCanney: Oh, yes.
Martin: Letís talk about that.
McCanney: That was a really bizarre announcement. There are many
assumptions in astronomy. Just to review what the Methuselah planet
is, apparently about 8 years ago they said they first discovered
this planet, if in fact, thatís what it is. They discovered it
around a pair of stars that they believe one to be a white dwarf,
one to be a pulsar. These are bizarre forms of stars, letís put it
that way. They detected a wobble in the motion of these two, and
apparently they were finally able to get a picture of this kind-of
"nub" off to the side of this twin-star system and positively
identify that there was a third object there, which they called the
Of course, Methuselah was the man who lived for 900 years in the Old
Testament. They called it this because it was believed that
stars in M4, which is the star cluster they were dealing with, it
was believed that these stars were 12 billion years old, some of the
oldest stars in our galaxy, and therefore, close to the age of the
Now, you have to make the assumption - or they do
- that the planet
formed when the stars formed. Of course, to my way of thinking,
thatís absolutely incorrect. The planet did not have to form when
the star formed. So, thatís the first error in their list of
Then they go through this convoluted argument that there could have
been other planets that formed around there at the same time, thusly
forming life-bearing planets. So these civilizations could have
lived 12 billion years ago, not that far away from us in the galaxy,
and would have died-off on the planet.
Now, this statement really surprises me, because the obvious
conclusion to any thinking person would be that possibly, in that 12
billion years, they became space-going, and may be residing on this
planet today. But they donít make that connection. They simply say
that they died-off on their planet.
Then they talk about the fact that
this planet is 12 billion years
old, almost the age of the universe, and that contradicts the "Big
Bang" Theory because it was believed that these stars had to form
two and three generations of stars before the heavy elements formed,
like iron and the other heavier elements, that would then form the
At any rate, they have all kinds of contradictions here. Is what
they are looking at even a planet, being twice the size of Jupiter?
Maybe itís a small star, not even a planet at all. The other
assumption is that planet, if it is a planet, formed when the stars
formed, according to their theory that solar systems form all at one
What I am saying is that these astronomers are being paid a lot of
money to speculate and daydream, because there is not a single one
of them who can prove any part of any of this. Iím personally
getting rather irritated at paying people to daydream. I like to
daydream, too, but I donít expect people to pay me for it, or fly me
around the world to attend extravagant meetings, or go to NASA and
have national news-releases based on wild speculation and
daydreaming. And thatís all this is.
Why would NASA announce something like
the Methuselah planet when
they had discovered it 8 years ago? The answer is: NASA is hurting.
Theyíve got no space program. Theyíve got nothing in space. The
Shuttle is not flying. Nobody believes the Shuttle story. And,
basically, NASA is a space agency without a space program. So,
theyíre trying to build-up public interest by giving these
I think that is whatís behind the story here because, like I said,
they discovered this 8 years ago. Why are they releasing this story
now and making such a big deal out of it?
Martin: Part of me thinks that this is to deflect attention away
from the whole
Planet X scenario. And, also, this is kind-of
"parallel", because the timing is about the same. Two nights ago I
saw a brief mention on CNN about NASA announcing that people should
not be worried about our planet being hit by asteroids because the
odds are way against it. It was a several-minute blurb about
asteroids and not to be afraid of asteroids. Now, why are they
talking about that now, and why are they mentioning this planet now?
Is it all Planet-X related?
McCanney: Thatís a very good statement because Iíve heard that too,
that statement about the asteroids. Theyíve said: "Itís been
recalculated that the probability of us being hit by an asteroid is
much lower than previously thought."
McCanney: So yes, I think theyíre trying to, in a subtle way, plant
these bugs in the peopleís minds:
"Donít think about that dangerous
outer-space stuff. You just keep working, and paying your bills, and
weíll watch the sky for you. Donít you think about that."
Martin: [Laughter] And, of course, nobody even brings up the subject
of "action at a distance".
McCanney: Right, absolutely. The real issue here is exactly that:
"action at a distance". They keep pounding on the theme: "Oh, we
have to be hit by something" and itís standard disinformation. They
have the reigns of the press, so they keep pounding on the same
falsehoods. Their goal, of course, is that 95% of the people will be
lulled to sleep and not think any more about all these issues.
Martin: I would imagine that, not only because of the Shuttle
situation, but I would imagine that NASA is feeling some real heat
about now, from many, many sources, because it seems like so much of
their water balloon is leaking all over the place.
McCanney: Well, yeah.
NASA is an agency, like many government
agencies. When it started out, everybody was an engineer, doing
something. When they had a project, everybody was in there working,
including the head guy.
Then, after a few years, some people
became administrators and they were administrating programs, and it
got bigger. Now itís to the point where nearly everybody is an
administrator of some kind.
McCanney: Thereís too many chiefs and few Indians. So, connected to
all these programs, all these administrators do is fly around, go to
meetings and chat, write papers that are published in the journals
that they oversee, and then get more funding. Weíve got $15 billion
dollars a year going into "administering" a space program that has
no space program.
Martin: Letís go back to the SOHO satellite and consider the fact
that SOHO is not the only thing up there to watch
the Sun, and yet,
we are not able, as civilians, to see whatís happening.
SOHO is the best satellite in existence for watching the
ongoing, real-time activities of the Sun - the flares, the comets
coming in, the very-near Sun activity, the energy coming off the
Sun. It was planned to be de-commissioned some time ago. So itís not
that unusual that it should be going off-line.
It has really
over-extended its lifetime by quite a bit. But what is NOT being
talked about is the fact that, this past Spring 2003, two very
large, new, big satellites to replace SOHO were launched with the
specific job "to measure momentarily and on an ongoing basis the
energy output of the Sun in all different aspects". In other words,
thatís something that SOHO really didnít do. It took pictures, and
you could get a feel for that.
But now, these satellites are much more sophisticated. They have two
of them for the simple reason that you need a perspective view of
the Sun to see if these big flares are coming directly at us and are
going to hit us. Because with SOHO, you didnít know if it was going
to hit us until it hit SOHO, and thatís only a million miles away;
so by the time it hit that it, essentially, was on top of us.
So, these new satellites, with a two-eye perspective, so to speak,
will be able to see the flares that are coming right at us. Also,
they can measure a lot more specifically all the different kinds of
energy coming off the Sun. They did this for a very specific reason.
In the "inner circle" it is very well known that the Sun is putting
out far more energy than it did 10 years ago. So, thatís the
specific story on SOHO.
The other story is that we have probably 40-45 ground-based solar
observatories that are staffed and funded by U.S. scientists, all
over the globe. We have magnetic measurement stations and systems
all over the globe. We have at least 20 other satellites - modern,
very sophisticated satellites - which are observing the Sun and Earth
weather from a distance, moving all around the Earth, out into
outer-space in our vicinity, some in Earth orbit, some in more
complicated orbits that go way out into the solar winds.
But we donít get a smidgen of data from any of these. Well, maybe
just a little bit, but what filters down to the public is absolutely
miniscule. Weíre paying for very expensive toys for very few people.
This information is being funneled-up into what I call the "Secret
Societies", basically the
small groups who manipulate the news and
are in control, building cave cities, stocking them for themselves,
creating wars in Iraq, and so on.
The scientists who work in these agencies form an interesting
statistic: 99% of all PhDs today are employed directly by the
government. That is especially true in space-science, astronomy, and
astrophysics. In that capacity, they are very much locked-in with
non-disclosure agreements, and literally cannot say anything about
anything that theyíre doing. Thatís why you only get these vague,
general, gee-whiz news releases out of NASA or the
Telescope, like this Methuselah planet, which is a non-story. Itís
really a non-story when you see all of the other, very important
things going on. But, thatís what they want the public to think,
that they are getting some kind of really important science here.
Itís really just a bunch of bull.
But, literally, the skies are crawling with these satellites
that doesnít include the military satellites that are up there
looking at the weather. And, of course, they have all of their own
meteorological departments. There are tens and tens of thousands of
scientists, engineers, and companies making tremendous amounts of
money on these satellites, and we do not get a single scrap of this
information. We still have our weathermen in their newsrooms getting
their weather feed from the National Weather Service, and they canít
tell you if itís going to rain tomorrow.
Martin: Are there any, that you know of, observatories in the
Southern Hemisphere that are, letís say, friendly to the people or
accessible by the common man?
McCanney: No, Iím not aware of any.
Martin: So, really, theyíre all locked-up?
McCanney: Yes, yes. Everything is top-down controlled. There are
spokespersons who would have you think that NASA is open, and there
is no problem, and they would always tell you if something was going
to happen. The reality is, thatís not true at all. Itís a totally
cloistered, close group of people. None of them can talk to you. If
you think otherwise, just call them up and ask them a real question.
McCanney: Youíll see that you cannot get one word out of them. What
theyíll do is tell you: "Oh, you want to talk to so and so." Then,
after youíve been passed around long enough, youíre going to realize
that there is nobody who is going to talk to you there about
anything real. They, literally, cannot. There was a time in the past
when I was able to pick up the phone and call lots of people.
of course, those days are over. In fact, Iím sure most people have a
little sign on their desk: "Donít talk to McCanney."