Dr.
Paul LaViolette
October 2000
Dr. Paul LaViolette has
written four books and has published many original papers in physics,
astronomy, climatology, systems theory, and psychology. He received
his BA in physics from Johns Hopkins, his MBA from the University
of Chicago, and PhD from Portland State University, and is currently
president of the Starburst Foundation, an interdisciplinary scientific
research institute. He is the developer of subquantum kinetics, a
novel approach to microphysics that accounts for electric, magnetic,
gravitational, and nuclear forces in a unified manner and resolves
many long-standing physics problems. Based on the predictions of this
theory, he developed an alternative cosmology that effectively replaces
the big bang theory. Dr. LaViolette has also developed a new theory
of gravity that replaces the deeply flawed theory of general relativity.
Predicted from subquantum kinetics, it accounts for the electrogravitic
coupling phenomenon discovered by Townsend Brown and may explain the
advanced aerospace propulsion technology utilized in the B-2 bomber.
In addition to his understanding of UFO and black budget craft propulsion
systems, including materialization and dematerialization, he has deep
knowledge of the inner workings of the U.S. Patent Office. He states
in this interview that, currently, if an invention doesn’t fit
into the accepted physics paradigm, the patent examiners immediately
reject it thinking it violates the paradigm and must be a mistake.
In effect, new energy technologies are the underdog: They don’t
fit the paradigm so they are left out of the needed funding, or their
patents are denied — even to the point that the Patent Office
is breaking the law. In order to alleviate the current Earth crises
of environmental pollution, global warming, etc. and advance as a
technological society, we need technologies that don’t fit into
the old paradigm.
… Let’s say there was a Roswell crash, and the National
Security Agency was formed to keep this all classified. Now, something
like that is a very emotional experience [with] some of your Government
officials. You realize there is extraterrestrial life, and they
have this advanced technology. When you become very emotional about
something, one reaction is to hide it and then see how we can use
this for ourselves — we’ve got to keep one step ahead
of the other countries. At that time we had a Cold War with the
Soviet Union, so the rationale was to use it for military purposes.
Suppose the same thing happened 100 years ago at the time the automobile
was developed? I sincerely believe we’d still be driving horses
and buggies today, because it would be feared that the automobile
could change warfare. It would mean a much higher speed of travel,
and obviously, we should classify this. At that time there wasn’t
the same mechanism in place; we didn’t have the NSA and this
major program to contain advanced technologies.
We think of science as being based on observation and being open
to change, but as you learn more about it and about the scientists
themselves, you realize how much it is a religion. It is very closed
[and] resistive to changing its fundamental principles…
There was a case of a Canadian fellow who had developed a technology
for producing enough power to power your house, out of something
about the size of a shoebox. It was a new way of wiring something
up — some sort of non-linear device. He was very open about
it and [about] publicizing it. One day his house was surrounded
by SWAT teams and all of his equipment was confiscated. He was arrested
on the grounds that he was harboring terrorist technology or weaponry,
and he was released only after he had signed something that said
he would not continue doing work in this area. Now he is mowing
lawns for a living…
The Patent Office, in its current approach, is actually breaking
the law. It is trying to make happy the physicists who are with
the American Physical Society — to keep them in power with
their ideas, you might say, and withhold from public use good inventions
that could solve our problems, like the energy crisis. There is
a whole pattern of this going on at the Patent Office. I personally
know it, because I was at the Patent Office for about a year and
I know some people there, and I know some of the things that were
going on. For example, there was somebody I know who issued a patent
on a process of sending signals faster than the speed of light.
This was then made fun of by Robert Park on his website. Through
their connections, they had this posted somewhere as the most ridiculous
patent of the year award — this sort of thing…
They can say what they want; it’s freedom of speech, but
for the Patent Office to do their bidding instead of following the
law — that is illegal…