Monday, 29 August 2016

Mass Hiccups Outbreak

There has been another epidemic of a disorder that should not be infectious, therefore a mystery. I've covered similar events in the background links below. This time the condition concerned is what doctors call a "diaphragmatic tic", better known as hiccups. The outbreak of hiccups affected two dozen pupils at two schools in Massachusetts, USA. The victims were all female and aged in their teens. The North Shore Technical School and Essex Aggie both began echoing to the sound of hiccups in late 2012 and it went on until mid-2013. The girl's who experienced hiccups had attacks that were so severe that witnesses describe them as "high-pitched yelps". Health inspectors visited the school and tested the air, food and water. The results were negative. There's no explanation for why this condition has spread through the same location. The schools are coeducational so why does it only affect female students? Psychologists have put the issue down to mass hysteria, which is a rather vague affliction without any definitive cause or symptoms; and it has been used as a cop-out diagnosis before, see the background links below. They even suggested that social media played a role in transmitting the illness. How on earth is that possible? It's true that in a stressful environment people will develop psychological trauma, but this trauma doesn't spread like a contagious disease. It emerges in different ways in different people at different times. This mysterious hiccup plague is very similar to The Hollinwell Incident and the other events that resemble it.

Sunday, 28 August 2016

St Helena Airport Update

The new airport on the remote island of St Helena was completed earlier in the year. I have been covering the development of the airport and the issues associated with it for some time, see the links below for essential background. Since then there have been a series of test takeoffs and landings to judge the aerial environment around the airport. This will provide vital information to pilots. Full commercial flight operations cannot begin until this study is complete. As I describe in the background links, there is a major problem at the airport with "wind shear". These are pockets of wind that change speed and direction very abruptly. For an aircraft approaching a runway or taking off from it, wind shear can be very dangerous. Because of this obstacle, the official opening of St Helena Airport has been put on hold indefinitely. The architects are now suggesting radical measures to solve the wind shear problem; they want to carry out further excavations at the Prosperous Bay Plain site. These will involve the removal of an entire hilltop, the King and Queen Rock, in an attempt to change the wind flow patterns around the airport. This might need diggers, drills and dynamite, depending on what the job will entail. The Daily Mail is now riling at the expanding cost of the project. It's been called the "worst foreign aid project in living memory"; however St Helena is not technically foreign, despite its geographical distance and isolation. It is a British Overseas Territory and therefore entitled to a share of national funds. What's more the airport is a good investment because it will hopefully give the island's economy such a boost that its need for state subsidies will be reduced or even eliminated. Another happy outcome of the airport delay is that the island's dedicated transport, the good ship RMS St Helena, will continue to operate. She was due for retirement this year after the airport opened and has even just completed what was supposed to be her final voyage. Now her retirement has been postponed until at least July of next year. Basically, the ship will necessary until the airport is fully up and running. Source: On the downside, the new dig will destroy more of St Helena's natural landscape; the airport has already transformed Prosperous Bay Plain forever. The area is one of significant natural diversity and the airport has adversely affected St Helena's wildlife. The Saints themselves are not unanimously in favour of the airport. I detail the pros and cons of St Helena Airport in the background links below. The English band Everafter have released a song called Last Boat to St Helena with lyrics that address the same concerns I have about the hazards posed by the airport, particularly to the island's people and culture, see:

Friday, 26 August 2016

Victor Nevada in the Media

My good friend and fellow researcher Andrew Burlington has been featured in the London newspaper News Shopper. The online edition includes a video Andrew shot in Charlton. Andrew has been capturing stills and footage of strange objects flying over east London for some time and he regularly shares his findings on social media. The news story is fairly good... compared to most others on the subject. Despite it using the demeaning phrases "UFO buff" and "hobby UFO researcher" it is long, detailed and reasonably factual. It includes statements from Andrew and mentions that both Nick Pope and Gary Heseltine endorse Andrew's discovery. Andrew's nephews were with him when he had his sighting and back him up too. The paper also takes Andrew's advice and contacted air traffic control at the nearby City of London Airport to see if they detected anything odd on radar, but they declined to comment. I wonder where that policy comes from. It might be worth getting them to say something via the Freedom of Information Act. Source: Regular followers of HPANWO will be familiar with Andrew because he is the man behind the "Victor Nevada" YouTube channel, the project to investigate the mysterious Alien Interview film, see: and:

Wednesday, 24 August 2016

An Open Letter to Tim Peake

See here for essential background to this subject:

Dear Maj. Peake
First I must congratulate you on your recent successful mission aboard the International Space Station. You've left no doubt that Britain is one of the big boys when it comes to space exploration. Since your return to earth you have, of course, made many statements and comments to the media, so I hesitate to ask you more questions about your mission. However I feel it is necessary because of the subject matter I'd like to discuss. So far your other media spots have not done so to my knowledge. When you were up in space, did you at any time see, or detect using other means, objects you could not identify, especially if their properties actively defied those of known objects such as meteors, planets, other spacecraft etc. If you did then I ask you to state it for the public record. You would not be alone in doing so. Many other astronauts have seen UFO's while on space missions dating right back to the beginning of the space programme. Jim McDivitt and Ed White saw a white cylindrical object during their Gemini 4 mission in 1965. Gennady Strekalov saw a UFO when aboard the Salyut space station and Buzz Aldrin reported seeing one on the historical Apollo 11 mission in 1969. In 2005 on your own space station, the ISS, your colleague Leroy Chiao reported seeing lights in a formation he described as "in a line" and "almost like an upside-down check mark". It's possible you have been briefed in on this matter already and ordered to keep silent on it. If this is the case, only you know what the best thing to do is. You can risk speaking anonymously to UFO researchers. If you do, make sure you select one who is professional, honest and will treat your information and source with the strictest of confidence; I cannot nominate recommendations here in case it jeopardizes your actions in the future. If you choose to go public you will gain the admiration of the entire UFO research community. The public acceptance of the UFO issue is, I think, one of the most important that the world and mankind face today. To be a part of that would be an achievement even greater than being our country's first astronaut.
Yours sincerely
Ben Emlyn-Jones

Tuesday, 23 August 2016

Brian Cox vs Climate Change "Denier"

Prof. Brian Cox has been up to his usual tricks. This time he's been wheeled out onto an Australian panel talk show to defend the notion of man-made climate change. The programme is entitled Q&A and is similar in format to the BBC's Question Time, albeit with a less formal arrangement; typically Australian. That smiling Simeon of the small screen was pitted against a politician, Senator Malcolm Roberts, an advocate for the idea that climate change is not caused by human activity, a viewpoint I share; see the background links below for more details. His Royal Coxness has clearly been coached in advance, indicating the producers anticipated or even planned this debate. He has with him a stack of scientific data printouts, including some graphs. The viewer cannot see the details of these in frame. The debate opens with Cox being given the complete floor for almost three minutes, with the host only asking him questions about what can we do about climate change etc. Cox says that the worst thing about climate change is that parts of the Middle East could become uninhabitable. That's odd because most climate scientists claim that rising sea levels are the biggest threat. Senator Roberts then gets less than a minute to respond before Cox interrupts him and produces one of the graphs. As I said, these can't be examined in detail by the viewer, but they clearly only show records since 1880. The host then quips: "Malcolm, you're hearing the interpretation of a highly qualified scientist and you're saying you just don't believe it; is that right?" The audience responds to the cue and laugh and applaud. They jeer at Roberts and laud Cox. That's strange because I always thought The Coxxer was a particle physicist, not a climatologist. What makes him more qualified than Roberts, who runs a climate sceptic think tank? As I've reported in my study of Cox, however much he knows about his own subject, he is pig ignorant about most others. He's made some extremely foolish comments on the paranormal, UFO's and conspiracy theories. Senator Roberts tries to explain the political forces, including those from NASA, that have corrupted the data that went into graphs like that and he is interrupted by Cox twice in the same sentence. "How?...  By who!?" (It's whom, not who. English grammar is another area where Cox' knowledge has very sparse coverage). Even the host then shuts Cox down and allows Roberts to have his say. Cox butts in after a mere forty seconds and scoffs: "NASA, the people who landed men on the moon!?" he then goes on to suggest Roberts doesn't believe in the moon landings. There's nothing wrong with that per se; I don't either, see:, but that's not the point. The point is that Cox is hitting Roberts with a personal slur; and Roberts, to his credit, picks him up on it. Cox doesn't address Roberts' concerns about institutional collaboration properly and misrepresents Roberts' position when it comes to its nature. After that the host brings in the other guests on the panel who do nothing except boast about the Paris Accord and other statements under the proviso that anthropogenic global warming is real. One of them says: "I can't believe we're having this discussion. We should be talking about what we're going to do about climate change!... It is real!...We have scientific consensus!" Roberts rightly picks them up on their fallacy of appeal to authority. Cox interrupts him after just twenty seconds. Then another panellist gives an anecdote about how her friends went swimming in winter. Cox then has another two minutes of the floor. Roberts, understanding the new rules of engagement, tries to interrupt twice, but not until Cox has been running downhill for over one minute twenty. When he gets his reply, Cox butts in after less than ten seconds. Eventually Roberts get the floor for another thirty seconds, but, sure enough, Mr Smiley-Face has to cut him off again: "No! That's flat out wrong!..." he says as he thumps the table, without actually explaining why Roberts is wrong. Then the host gives Cox a one minute twenty second monologue. After that he takes a comment from the audience and the discussion shifts back to the climate change establishment a priori position. The host eventually turns to Senator Roberts and asks him sarcastically: "If you (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) were in government, would you just sack all the climate scientists?" There's a serious point behind this jibe that the host doesn't realize. However much he polarized the issue, climate change is big business; one of the biggest in the world. It is an industry in itself; see background links below for details. Roberts tries to reply, but after thirty seconds the host clears his throat and the audience chuckle. "Final word to Prof. Brian Cox." he announces. Cox' "final word" is over two minutes of being the star of the show yet again. Then an entirely new subject is raised from the floor. Later in the programme, when climate change is briefly mentioned again, Cox actually throws the papers at Roberts in an aggressive way. Source:

There's no doubt that under the rules of proper logic, Senator Roberts won this debate. The problem is that this was not a logical TV show... how many are these days? The other panellists, led by Prof. Cox-Head, failed to respond to Roberts' points and just quoted consensus and establishment at him, mixed with rhetoric, ad hominem and appeals to emotion. As TV debates go, this is yet another one-sided unprofessional hatchet job, right down there in the gutter with Ken Livingstone's Nazi one, see: There is no doubt any more that Prof. Brian Cox is being set up as the golden boy of authoritarian scientific media deception. I just hope my antipodean fellow viewers saw through this debacle. I would be disappointed if they haven't because it was easier than usual for me. The mainstream press has been particularly frenzied over this, for example see:

Monday, 22 August 2016

Anjem Choudary arrest Blocked by MI5

The Islamic hate-preacher Anjem Choudary was found guilty of supporting terrorism at the end of July 2016. The press was restricted from reporting on it until only last week because it might potentially prejudice another trial (This in itself is interesting because nothing leaked at all. Skeptics always tell us big secrets can't be kept in the modern world. How much else has been restricted and we never find out?). Choudary will be sentenced next month and will probably be given ten years or so in prison. I've reported on Anjem Choudary before, see background links below. He read law at university and was already a trained solicitor before he was recruited by MI6. During the Bosnian war he worked for British intelligence, running behind the scenes operations against the Serbian forces occupying Muslim regions of Bosnia. After the war he underwent a sudden change of life... apparently. He left MI6 and became a radical Muslim extremist, growing his beard long and wearing traditional Islamic garb. He founded an organization that has gone by many names, but is usually known as Al Muhajiroun. He and his cohorts do very little except when TV and newspaper cameras are present; then they seem to appear like magic out of nowhere, in their skullcaps, beards and shirttails. They perform some inflammatory and antisocial act like picketing a soldier's funeral or burning Remembrance poppies in front of the media, and then they simply go home. They're never referred to in the press at any other time unless it's to report on the social security benefits they receive. Choudary was finally arrested and jailed, but will he ever go to prison? I doubt it. As I explain in detail below, it's very likely indeed that Choudary is a disinformation agent planted deliberately in the media to play the role of "evil Muslim cleric". As we see in this debate, Choudary the devout Muslim can't even speak proper Arabic and doesn't know his verses off by heart: We will be told he's gone to prison, but he will simply be reassigned. Either that or he'll shave off his beard, if it's even real, and retire to some luxury villa in Dubai, see: Since then RT has come across additional information that the police have wanted to prosecute Anjem Choudary for many years, believing they had evidence to charge him with up to fifteen counts under antiterrorist law, but were stopped from doing so by direct orders from MI5. They were told Choudary had to remain free because he was crucial to MI5 ongoing investigations... I bet he was! A police source said: "I am gobsmacked that we allowed him to carry on as long as he did. He was up to his neck in it, but the police can’t do full investigations on people if the security service say they are working on a really big job, because they have the priority. That is what they did constantly. While the police might have had lots of evidence, we were pulled back by the security service because Choudary was one of the people they were monitoring. It was very frustrating and did cause some tension, but we were told we had to consider the bigger picture." I hope people reading this will become more suspicious of government's pronouncements when whoever Choudary's replacement is, is paraded in the popular press as the comic book antagonist we all have to unite and fight, see:

Sunday, 21 August 2016

CERN Occult Ritual

A very strange and frightening video has emerged from CERN, the particle physics laboratory housing the world's largest atom-smasher. I've covered CERN extensively in the background articles below, including the statue of the Hindu god Shiva in pride of place in the courtyard. The video is shot from a window at night overlooking the statue. The area is very quiet and nobody is in sight, as you'd expect late at night. A group of seven human figures emerge from the darkness beyond the frame and take up positions at the edge of the lit patio surrounding the statue. They are all dressed in long black robes with a hood, like an ecclesiastical cowl. They move expertly, as if well-rehearsed and experienced at what they're doing. The cameraman is male and speaks English with an English accent. He exclaims "What the fuck!?" when the figures appear. However his camera is rolling before the figures emerge, as if he is expecting them. He zooms in at the same time as one of the figures steps forward and removes the cowl of another in front, revealing that she is a young woman. She looks naked or wearing a thin white garment. The woman lies down flat on the ground and one of the other figures draws a dagger from their clothing. They hold it above their head and step forward. They appear to stab the supine woman in the belly. The cameraman gasps and yells with fear. The camera frame wheels as he loses control of his device. He returns to the window for one more brief glimpse that is out of focus, then he flees and the video ends. The whole incident lasts less than two minutes CERN management have admitted that this incident was carried out on their premises, but it was not done with their knowledge or permission. They say that this is a fake reproduction and not a real human sacrifice. They are currently investigating the event and Geneva police have been informed. A spokesman said: "CERN welcomes every year thousands of scientific users from all over the world and sometimes some of them let their humour go too far. This is what happened on this occasion." If they're so sure of that, why do they need to investigate? See: The individuals must have security clearance to have access to the site and therefore are staff or official visitors to CERN. Security at CERN is very tight and even involves optical scanners for the most restricted areas. The subject came up in this week's Mind Set Podcast, see: It's possible this is just an elaborate prank. Academics and students do have strange practices and set up fraternities with unusual rituals. The cameraman may well be involved, which could explain why he happened to be filming at the right time and in the ideal place to capture the event perfectly. However, based on what I discuss in the background links, something more serious and dangerous might be going on. Perhaps there is real occult activity in this most sinister and potentially destructive location. It's even possible that what we're seeing is a direct effect of interdimensional intrusion caused by the operations of the Large Hadron Collider itself. In other words, the figures are men-in-black type entities from beyond our universe. Time will tell. Hopefully there will be an update soon.