A lot of us have jobs that don't provide us with any useful exercise, and a quick glance at the history of jobs over the past few centuries will show that this problem is becoming increasingly worse. Our jobs are becoming increasingly less physical and more mental, and therefore, it's becoming increasingly important for us get some exercise during our leisure time.

Some people exercise at home, or jog through the city streets, or join a private exercise facility, but we should do more than simply force ourselves to exercise. Exercise is becoming a necessary aspect of human life, and so we ought to look for ways of making recreational activities so enjoyable that we want to get exercise rather than force ourselves to do it. All of us would benefit in various ways if we were living among people who were in better physical health, so this issue doesn't merely concern you; it concerns all of society. Furthermore, we may be able to develop some recreational activities that do more than merely provide exercise. For example, we may be able to design some that also provide opportunities to socialize, or do something useful for society. So, let's begin by looking at how I will use these three words:

If we had video documentation of our distant ancestors, I think we would discover that sports and games developed very slowly and inadvertently many thousands of years ago simply becauses all animals, especially the males, like to compete for dominance. It's so natural for men to compete with one another that we do it without being aware of it. For example, when men are jogging or riding bicycles, one of them might challenge the other to get to the top of the hill quicker.

If we could watch our primitive ancestors, we would find that they were occasionally challenging each other in informal competitions to see who could swim across a river faster, throw a rock the farthest, and run the fastest. These competitions slowly developed rules, and eventually they became regular events. About 2800 years ago the first Olympic event was held. It had only one event, a short foot race. Through the years more sports events were added to the Olympics, such as  throwing a disk, jumping, and throwing a spear.

During the past few centuries, a lot of sports and games have been created, but there was never a point at which people decided to look at what they were doing and ask themselves, "Hey, where are we going with sports and games?" Even today our sports are developing and evolving in a haphazard manner.
 

I don't think many of our sports and games are providing much of a benefit to us, and some of them are detrimental or require absurd amounts of resources. An example of a sport that we should abandon are the food eating contests. The contestants don't gain anything from these contests, and neither does society. Actually, the contestants suffer potential health problems, and society suffers because it wastes food, and it may also encourage bad behavior among children.

Humans are the only creature on the planet with the ability to analyze its culture and bring improvements to it, so we ought to take advantage of our talent. We should analyze all of our games and exercises and modify them so that they provide at least one benefit, such as:

1) Exercise.
2) Entertainment.
3) Socializing, including helping single people meet and find a spouse.
4) Contributing something to society.
5) Helping people learn about themselves, or life, or some useful skill.

We should also consider the detrimental effects of a game, such as the potential injuries, and the resources required. We may not be able to bring dramatic improvements to games or exercises, but even bringing small improvements is better than nothing. For example, if all we can do is make some exercises and games more appealing, then we will have accomplished something beneficial because we will encourage more people to get some exercise, socialize, or whatever benefit the particular activity provides.
 

Our crude emotions cause us to be afraid to make changes in our life, but it would be shocking if we failed to improve all of our activities. As I pointed out in Part 7, do you realize how stupid we would have to be if we could not figure out how to improve upon activities that developed inadvertently and haphazardly? I think the human race can improve exercises, games, and sports if we stop behaving like fish and get into the habit of asking such questions as:

What is the purpose of this activity? Who benefits from it, and what is the benefit? Is there a way to modify it to make it more appealing, or more useful to the participants or to society? Is there a way to reduce the injuries or expense of this activity?

I think that as soon as a society finds the courage to start experimenting with games and sports, we will start developing variations that we prefer, and we will eventually look back at the activities of today as crude or silly. However, don't expect culture to be improved within a few days. It's going to require a lot of experiments and discussions. It's going to be as slow and difficult as improving refrigerators or computers. Also, most of the attempts to make something better will be failures, so be prepared for that. Actually, if you expect a lot of failures, then you won't be disillusioned when they happen.

A video of chessboxing is here

For example, somebody who enjoys both boxing and chess has combined the two activities into "chessboxing" in which the athletes alternate between punching each other in the face and playing chess. However, I would not describe this as an improvement to the existing activities. This is simply combining an existing sport with an existing game. It is like combining a refrigerator and a microwave oven. It doesn't actually create an activity that is truly better in some way for the athletes, the audience, or society.

Chessboxing is amusing to watch once or twice, but it is as silly as "dance-boxing" in which people alternate between having a romantic dance and then punching each other in the face. Comedians might be able to use dance-boxing in a skit in which they make jokes about marriage, but unless a new sport has greater benefits to either the athletes or to society, then it is just a variation of what we already have rather than an improvement.

For another example, in 1984 two people created The International Obfuscated C Code Contest. For about 20 years they selected winners of this contest, which was to write a short computer program in the most confusing manner. That contest provided some momentary entertainment, but it was as worthless as collecting random numbers.

Improving culture is going to take time and effort. Don't expect to come up with some brilliant improvement within an hour. However, we must start the process of trying to improve our culture because if we don't, we are allowing ourselves to be manipulated, which brings me to the next topic.

I pointed out in Part 7 that leisure activities are being inadvertently and deliberately influenced by lunatics, crime networks, businesses, religions, and governments. The same problem is occurring with games and sports, but businesses have an even more significant effect over sports because there is a lot of money to be made in the production and sale of sports equipment, trophies, sports stadiums, sports clothing, and items for the audience.

Furthermore, government officials occasionally promote certain sports in order to increase tax revenue or appease the voters. For example, some officials promote the construction of sports stadiums on the grounds that it will provide jobs. The Olympic contests are probably the best example of this. Nations fight with each other over convincing the mysterious, secretive people who control the Olympics to allow the Olympics to be held in their nation. However, the government officials, businessmen, and other people who promote the Olympics are not interested in helping the human race. Rather, they are trying to exploit the Olympics for profit or political purposes. They are taking advantage of the athletes and the audience.
 

The boardgame Train is not a game! It is a serious crime.

Brenda Brathwaite is referred to as the "Sex in Games Lady" because she has been promoting sex in video games. In 2009 she created a Holocaust board game called Train to promote the Jewish propaganda that Nazis put Jews onto trains and sent them to death camps. However, this is not a "game". This should be described as an attempt to manipulate and deceive us into believing Jewish lies about the Holocaust. 

There is currently no nation that prohibits people from lying about the Holocaust, the 9/11 attack, or any other crime. In fact, to make the situation even more disgusting, the Jews are trying to create laws that prohibit people from telling the truth about the Holocaust! We are unbelievable suckers for allowing this extreme level of abuse. We shouldn't tolerate people who lie about crimes, or who spread propaganda. And we shouldn't allow them to justify it by claiming to be stupid or ignorant. People who abuse us should be classified as dangerous, destructive, diabolical, manipulative criminals, and they should be exiled or executed. We should stop allowing people to abuse us!.
 

Organized religions do not seem much interested in influencing sports or exercises, but they are involved to a small extent in influencing children's games and school activities, and they are constantly struggling to exploit Christmas and other holidays. Of course, some of the groups that describe themselves as "religions" are better classified as "organized crime networks" that are pretending to be religions in order to take advantage of the benefits that our society provides to religions. For example, a school in North Carolina suspended a 14-year-old girl for wearing a ring in her nose, and on 8 October 2010, a federal judge ordered the school to allow her back in school. The judge and the ACLU point out that the girl is a member of the Church of Body Modification and is wearing a nose ring because it's part of her religion!

That "religion" is another example of how foolish we are to allow people to claim that they represent some God, and how foolish we are to let religions have tax or other benefits. And we are foolish to allow religions to exploit their members for money. If we set higher standards of behavior for people in influential positions, I suspect that all of the religious leaders would be removed from society on the grounds that they are con-artists or psychos. I can understand and accept people who want to believe in a God, but I think that only lunatics believe that they are a spokesman for a God, and only con artists, criminals, and parasites are collecting money in the name of a God.
 

We shouldn't be passive, submissive creatures who allow businesses, religions, criminals, and other groups of people to abuse and manipulate us. Instead, we should become active participants in our future and decide for ourselves what we want our culture to be, and what sort of recreational activities we want. We should take control of our culture and give ourselves the lives we want. We should change our attitude towards recreation and consider it to be a necessary part of human life rather than an optional activity. We shouldn't depend upon businesses to provide us with recreation or exercise. We should get involved with these issues and give ourselves the activities we want.

I think the solution is to design a city so that recreational facilities are incorporated into the city parks and gardens, and all of us should have easy access to all of the facilities. We should be able to walk into any of them at any time without being bothered to show membership cards or pay fees. 

Furthermore, we should experiment with exercises and recreational activities in order to figure out if we can devise some activities that do more than merely provide exercise. For example, we may be able to create some activities that encourage people to socialize, or do something of value for society while they exercise. We may also be able to develop some exercise machines that have sensors that we can use to collect data about our heart rate, blood pressure, or other physical or mental characteristics, and this may help some of us to maintain our health, or discover or understand some of our problems.

Engineers have made dramatic improvements to transportation devices during the past century, but it may not be possible to make such dramatic improvements to exercises or recreational activities. However, even if all we can do is make recreational activities more appealing, then we will have accomplished something useful because all of us will benefit if we are living among people who are in better physical and mental health than we have right now.

Whenever you look at history, it's important to keep in mind that we cannot trust any historian because all historians are promoting Jewish propaganda. I think some historians are criminals who are deliberately promoting propaganda in order to protect the Jews, and some historians are simply too incompetent to realize that they are promoting Jewish propaganda, and some historians realize that they are promoting propaganda, but they are afraid to stand up to the criminal Jews.

In this section I want to point out another problem that we must be aware of. Specifically, a person's analysis of history depends upon his intellectual abilities and emotions. People with crude personalities, emotional disorders, or mental illness are going to provide us with a different view of history compared to somebody who has a better quality mind. For example, why were the Greek Olympic games restricted to men, and why were the men naked? Different people will answer those questions differently simply because we have different personalities, even if we have access to the exact same information about ancient Greece.

Some historians find a sexual significance in the nudity of the ancient Greek athletes. However, if you saw my article that shows drawings of clothing from France during the 1400s, then it should be easy to understand that it would have been even more difficult for the ancient Greeks to produce clothing compared to the people of the 1400s. Therefore, the ancient Greeks would have had slightly less clothing, and it would have been slightly more crude. Furthermore, Greece has a much warmer climate than France, so there was less of a need for clothing, especially while competing in athletic events on warm days.

I think the nudity of the ancient Greek athletics was simply because most of the men didn't want to bother wearing a crude dress while competing in athletic events. Keep in mind that the most dresses in that era didn't have buttons. They didn't have zippers or Velcro, either. And there weren't many dresses that had belt loops. Would you want to compete in a sports event while wearing a crude dress? Clothing would have been a problem for female athletes, also.

It's important to realize that shoes and clothing were prized possessions throughout most of human history. It has only been recently, and only in the wealthier nations, that clothing has become so inexpensive that people have been treating it as worthless. The ancient Greeks didn't have stainless steel sewing needles, and thread had to be made by hand. It required a tremendous amount of time, effort, and talent for them to make clothing. This, incidentally, is the reason that women would proudly show off their clothing.

The people in ancient Greece would have taken care of their clothing, not abused it. Therefore, it's conceivable that some women were putting pressure on their husbands and sons to be naked simply because they didn't want the men to destroy clothing that required a tremendous amount of time and effort to produce. It's also conceivable that a man took his clothing off before a competition simply out of consideration for what his wife or mother had created for him. And it's conceivable that some of the young and single men were naked simply because they didn't have as much clothing as the older and married men.
 

History should not be considered as a list of facts. It is an analysis of human life; it is a person's interpretation of some very limited and often distorted information. Different people will analyze the same events and produce different conclusions. We can see this even with events that are happening today, such as the 9/11 attack.

Everybody who analyzes the ancient Greek Olympics will come to a slightly different conclusion simply because we have different minds. Therefore, it's important that we understand the personality and the attitudes of the historians in order to help us understand why they are interpreting history the way they do. The people who enjoy homosexuality, for example, are more likely than heterosexuals to find a sexual significance in the nudity of the ancient Greek Olympics.

This concept applies to zoology, biology, and every other subject that stimulates our emotions. For example, there are some people who interpret the strange sexual behavior of animals, such as dogs trying to have sex with a human leg, or the video of a chimpanzee using a frog as a sex toy, as evidence that homosexuality, pedophilia, beastialty, and other types of sex are perfectly "natural" for both animals and humans.

Do you think these realistic dolls could be a solution to pedophilia?

For another example, Milton Diamond (photo) is the director the Pacific Center for Sex and Society at the University of Hawaii, and he shows evidence that we can reduce pedophilia by legalizing child pornography.

His analysis is probably accurate, but I think it's equivalent to somebody claiming that we can reduce loneliness with pet dogs, or that we can reduce unhappiness with alcohol, Ecstasy, and heroin. We could probably reduce pedophilia by providing everybody with free access to sexually complete, realistic dolls of babies and children. However, whether these are solutions to our problems depends upon your personality. I suspect that Milton Diamond enjoys child pornography or pedophilia, and that in turn is biasing all of his research in favor of pedophilia.
 

Another example of how your personality affects your interpretation of history is the issue of why the Olympics in ancient Greece were restricted to men. Was it because of sexism?

Nobody knows what event the Olympics evolved from, but in this Wikipedia article is a remark that the Olympics evolved from an annual footrace between young women. If that is true, then we could interpret that evolution in different ways. For example, some feminists might claim that the sexist men took control of a foot race and pushed the women aside. However, I would say that some men got the idea of having a foot race for themselves after being inspired by the foot race of the young women.

I don't see any sexism in the world today, and I don't think there was any sexism in ancient Greece. When I look at the men in the world today, I see most single men struggling to appease women in order to attract a wife, and I see a lot of married men pampering their wives and daughters to such an extreme that they have created spoiled brats who whine about sexism and liberation. I'm sure that the men in ancient Greece were similar to the men of today. The primary difference would have been that the women in ancient Greece didn't have feminists encouraging them to have tantrums. As a result, the women of ancient Greece would have behaved in their more "natural" manner, which would have been to spend most of their time with women and children, and the men would have spent most of their time with men.

Men and women don't have enough in common to spend a lot of time together. Our natural tendency is to segregate. Unfortunately, the feminists are fooling people into thinking that a man can be a woman's best friend. There are some low-quality men promoting this propaganda, also, and I think it's because it helps them to get women that they would otherwise never get. For example, I have personally known some disgusting, Jewish men who behaved like puppy dogs around women, and I have seen how this behavior titillates women. If women were taught to look for the "old-fashioned" husband who could take care of his wife and family, then a lot of these "puppy dog Jews" would have trouble attracting women.

The attractive, wealthy, and famous women are pursued constantly by freaks, parasites, and criminals, many of whom promote feminism and behave like puppy dogs. As I write this, Taylor Swift is in the news for a variety of reasons, such as being the youngest person selected as Entertainer Of The Year, and for her relationship with Jake Gyllenhaal. Because of secrecy, we cannot see how he treats her, but look at this remark:

Although the 19-year-old and Jake, 29, have only been dating since October, they've been inseparable in that time.

Gyllenhaal, who is partly Jewish, has eyelids that some people consider to be "reptilian".

If there was no secrecy, and if we could observe Taylor Swift and Jake Gyllenhaal, would we find him behaving like a respectable, 29-year-old  man? Or like a puppy dog?

Incidentally, Jake Gyllenhaal is the godfather to the daughter of his "best friend" Heath Ledger. Randy and Evi Quaid (who I mentioned here) are claiming that Heath Ledger was murdered by the mysterious "Star Whackers". I also find it interesting that Jake Gyllenhaal, Heath Ledger, and Randy Quaid were the three main actors in the homosexual movie, Brokeback Mountain. Gyllenhaal also worked with Randy Quaid's brother, Dennis, in the global warming propaganda movie The Day After Tomorrow. Now some mental health "experts" are saying that the Quaids may be suffering from a peculiar type of mental illness called "folie a deux", so perhaps the Jews are trying to set the Quaids up for a double suicide. If the Quaids commit suicide, will Jake think anything strange that many of the people he closely worked with are dead?

Gyllenhaal also complained that the American soldiers didn't do much during the 1991 war in Iraq other than masturbate. When I look at photos of what the Americans did during that war, I see a tremendous amount of destruction. If China had bombed America to the same extent that America bombed Iraq during 1991, none of us would describe it as "Chinese soldiers did nothing but masturbate". Obviously, as with many Jews, Gyllenhaal wanted an incredible destruction of Iraq. What does Taylor Swift find attractive about this man? If the two of them get married, will they have children? Or will they be breeding criminals?

Gyllenhaal reminds me of Ryan Seacrest, another famous entertainer who began pursuing a teenage girl (Julianne Hough) after his other relationships failed. Incidentally, Seacrest is supposedly getting a $60 million contract with Clear Channel Communications. Who believes Seacrest is worth that much money? This article describes him as radio's "New Messiah", and a "Golden Boy"! More amazing is the remark that he deserves the money more than the highly paid athletes because "They don't sacrifice themselves for the good of mankind like Ryan Seacrest." The propaganda in that article is so extreme that I wonder if it's satire. See if you can figure it out!

What exactly has Seacrest done to justify such an incredible income and so much influence over society? From what I can see, he's just like everybody else in the media; namely, covering up horrendous crimes by Jews. Therefore, his girlfriend ought to wonder about his possible connections to the Jewish crime network, but she is supposedly disappointed that he hasn't proposed to her!

Does Aaron Nelson approve of Ryan Seacrest?

Don't her parents have any concern that Seacrest may be involved with a horrible, international crime network? Don't her friends or parents have any concern that these diabolical, murderous, disgusting criminals may be putting hidden microphones in her home, automobile, or telephone? Don't they worry that the criminals are watching her e-mail messages? Don't they wonder if Seacrest and Hough will have children that future generations are proud of, or if they produce freaks that future generations despise? Or is her stepfather, Aaron Nelson, secretly involved with the Jewish criminals?
 

Women have a very strong desire to make themselves visually attractive and then display themselves to other people. They want to be the center of attention; to be admired; to be loved. They are extremely titillated by the Hollywood awards ceremonies where they can pose for photographs in front of large crowds of admirers.

A woman's fantasy

Men want to be the center of attention, also, except that instead of being passive creatures who are loved, we want to be the dominant male in the hierarchy. We want to be a leader who tells everybody what to think and what to do. We are in a constant struggle with one another to prove that we are the most talented, the most educated, the smartest, and the strongest. We want to feel important. We want to be a dictator, and we want other people to respect and obey us. We want other people to be submissive towards us. We don't want anybody criticizing or questioning us.

A man's fantasy

It's important to understand men and women

Understanding the differences between men and women is very useful. It can help you to understand why people interpret history differently, and it can also help you to avoid being manipulated by criminals, salesmen, or politicians. Men who cannot understand or control their cravings for status can be manipulated by people who praise us or behave in a submissive manner towards us. Likewise, women who cannot control their cravings to be the center of attention may be manipulated by people who behave like puppy dogs or who offer the women the opportunity to be famous.
 

Don't be ashamed of human qualities. We are advanced monkeys, and we need to face reality rather than withdraw into a religious fantasy. You should understand yourself and learn about your limitations and weaknesses. Men, for example, are primarily concerned with the physical appearance of a woman, which made sense thousands of years ago because the physically attractive women were in the best mental and physical health. Unfortunately, even neurotic women today can be visually attractive. Worse yet, robots are becoming attractive! (Although the current robots are crude, it will be difficult for us to resist them after another century!)

Women, by comparison, are attracted to the dominant men, which also made sense thousands of years ago, but today a lot of men are becoming important through inheritances, crime, and nepotism. This is allowing psychos, criminals, and freaks to get women today. For example, Julianne Hough described Ryan Seacrest as:

"Oh my gosh, he's phenomenal"... "He's really romantic. He's not even in town, and I got in my car and there are flowers everywhere."

Is that all a man has to do to get a woman excited? Unfortunately, yes! And a woman doesn't have to do anything to get a man, except to look pretty!

Which is more pathetic: a) men who are attracted to pretty robots? b) women who are attracted to criminals, lunatics, and parasites who give them gifts and behave like puppy dogs?

If a woman has an abnormal craving to be the center of attention, how could she be happy with a normal, healthy man? The only man she may find attractive is a man who spends hours a day pampering her and following her around like a puppy dog. Likewise, a man with intense cravings to feel important may not be happy with a normal woman. Instead, he may be attracted to the mindless, submissive, and parasitic women who treats him like a King. Or maybe he will prefer a dog or a robot. Or, if a man is craving attention because he has low self-esteem, he may behave like a puppy dog in order to please women.

The famous people in Hollywood would probably be embarrassed if we could observe their pathetic relationships, but all of us would benefit if we could study the entire human race in the same serious manner that we study animals. People should stop being ashamed of themselves. We're not helping one another or ourselves by hiding what we do and who we are. Every man and woman should be proud of their spouse, not worried that somebody will hear what they talk about or see how they treat one another. Taylor Swift, Christina Aguilera, and all of the other women should be proud of the men that they are thinking of marrying, not afraid that somebody will post a video on the Internet of the two of them talking to one another.

If you feel a need to hide a relationship, you should consider that something is very wrong. There was no secrecy thousands of years ago, and we don't need it today. The only people who benefit from secrecy are the people who want to deceive us. 

We live for a very short period of time, and we are young for only a couple decades. We don't have time to fool around with lies, deception, secrecy, and confusion. We need to understand life as much as possible, and as soon as possible, so that we can set up a life that we enjoy.
 

If we could remove the secrecy and observe all of the relationships between men and women, we would eventually get a better understanding of why men and women are having so many troubles. We might discover that a lot of the fights are simply because feminism has given women some ridiculous expectations of men. Likewise, men may have some unrealistic views of what women are because television and movies are frequently promoting women as extremely sexual and somewhat perverted. A lot of television programs also portray men as incompetent and childish, and who needs a wife to provide them with supervision. (Incidentally, I suspect that if we could analyze the men who create those television shows, we would find that they have an "Ugly Duckling attitude", or a "Beauty and the Beast attitude", as I described in Part 6.)

An analysis of everybody's relationships might also show us that a mistake that many women are making is to assume that they can marry a man with terrible qualities, and then make him better through rewards and punishments.

The point I'm trying to make is that you might be embarrassed at the thought of people observing you, but observing everybody's behavior and arguments would help us to understand the human mind, and all of us would benefit from that. The only people who would suffer from a lack of secrecy are the people who are truly disgusting.
 

Getting back to the ancient Greek Olympics, I think they were restricted to men simply because the natural tendency of men and women is to have separate activities. Furthermore, keep in mind that the ancient Greek islands were not covered with luxury hotels, restaurants, taxis, airlines, and tourist attractions. The photo shows the view from a hotel in Greece, but there were no pineapples in Greece 2500 years ago. Also, keep in mind that the ancient Olympic Games were not held in high quality stadiums with comfortable seating, nice public bathrooms, or drinking fountains that dispensed clean water.

Attending the ancient Olympic Games would have been a crude, brutal, camping trip, not a fun, casual vaction for the entire family. Furthermore, how many people find it entertaining to watch men run around a dirt track or throw a disk? Even today only a small minority of the population is interested in watching those type of sports. I would bet that most women and children had no desire to attend the Olympic Games. Our disgusting historians are giving people a terrible view of life and history.

If we could analyze the men who participated or watched the Olympics, we might find that they tended to be young and single, and many may have been homosexual, simply because those men didn't have to be concerned about taking care of a wife or family. Therefore, if there was a lot of homosexuality at the Olympics, it wasn't because homosexuality was common in that era.
 

If we could do an analysis of the sexual behavior of the men who get involved with the sport of bodybuilding, we might find that they have a higher percentage of homosexuals and bisexuals compared to the general population, and if so, the reason might be because the sport is attracting men who have that feminine quality of wanting to look attractive and display themselves.

The reason I mention this possibility is in case historians find evidence that there was a lot of homosexuality among the Greek athletes, and if those historians claim that homosexuality is widespread and "natural". If we find a lot of homosexuality among the Greek athletes, we should consider the possibility that those early Olympics were simply attracting a lot of homosexuals and bisexuals, which brings me to the next two important points.

• Different sports attract different audiences

The audience of most sports events appear to be a random sample of the population, but none of us are selecting sports at random. We attend only certain sports events, and we watch only certain events on television. If we could study the audience of every sport, we would find subtle differences in the personalities of each audience.

• Each of us is attracted to different sports and games

A lot of us are physically and financially capable of getting involved in one or more sports or games, but we get involved only in the sports or games that appeal to us. I think if we could study everybody, we would find that every sport and game is attracting a slightly different personality. For example, I personally don't like the "contact sports". I don't enjoy being stepped on, pushed, or hit, especially not by men who are dripping sweat on other players, such as in basketball and wrestling.

Many people have noticed that the sport of ice hockey has lots of fights, and they assume that it's attracting men who enjoy fighting, but there may be more to them than an aggressive personality. They may be the type of men who like to make rapid, quick decisions, and who like the mental challenge of hitting an object so that it travels along a certain path. We might find that hockey players enjoy a certain type of math, also. And we might find this is also true of other sports in which people must hit objects accurately, such as tennis or billiards.

The people who like to run short distances around an oval track might have a different personality than the people who like to run marathon races. The people who like to play baseball might have a different personality than the people who like gymnastics.
 

News reports sometimes mention that there is a lot of prostitution and casual sex among both the athletes and the audience of the Olympics and World Cup soccer games. For example, when the Olympics were held in Vancouver, Canada in 2010, there was so much casual sex that they had a shortage of condoms, and the city had to ask for an emergency shipment.

Are the people attracted to sports more sexually active than the rest of the population? Or is their sex simply more noticeable because a large group of people are getting together in a very small area? If we could analyze the sexual behavior of the human race then we could determine if there really is more sex at sports events, and that might help us to understand the ancient Greek Olympics. Perhaps the people attracted to sports are having more sex because they are younger, more likely to be single, and have higher levels of physical energy. Or perhaps they have slightly different personality characteristics than the rest of us. We might also discover that some sports have more casual sex; others have more prostitution; and others have more homosexual sex.
 

The audience of a sports event is also influenced by the location of the event. The Olympics and the World Cup, for example, are not "local" events that attract only people who live nearby. Instead, a lot of the people in the audience travel a long distance to get to those events. Therefore, the audience of the Olympics and the World Cup are not the same people as the audience of the local sports event, even if the events are the same sports and the same athletes.

A lot of people may not be interested in traveling to the Winter Olympics because they don't want to spend several days at a cold, dark area, but if a sports event is held in an area that provides a lot of tourism opportunities, then many people may attend mainly for the tourism. For example, during the months prior to the 2010 World Cup soccer game, there were news reports that 40,000 prostitutes were planning to travel to South Africa in order to service the athletes and spectators. However, after the game was over, the prostitutes complained that almost nobody was interested in their services. Apparently, the people who decided to travel to South Africa were primarily interested in visiting Africa, not the prostitutes. By comparison, there may be a lot more sex, drinking, or gambling during the Winter Olympics because the cold weather may cause more boredom.

I don't know exactly what is affecting the audience of a sport event, but my point is that if we could understand these issues, it could help us understand sports events, and it might help us decide on how and where to hold business meetings.
 

If people would get over their embarrassment of themselves and allow scientists to collect data about their personal lives, then we could do a lot of important analyses of the human body and mind - assuming, of course, that we can get the criminals out of science! For example, an analysis of everybody's eating habits might show us that different races of people have slightly different attractions to food and drugs. We might discover that the races that developed in areas where there was lots of fruit have a stronger attraction to sugar, or a greater resistance to diabetes. We might find that some races of people have a greater attraction to meat, and some races may have more of an attraction to alcohol. An analysis of the people who consume large amounts of free samples of food at farmers markets, Costco, Sam's Club, and social events, such as Larry Zinter, might show us that certain personality characteristics or certain races are more prone to this behavior.

From my casual observations of people, it seems that most cigarette smokers also like caffeine, but not all people who like caffeine are interested in tobacco. I think the people who are attracted to cigarettes are actually attracted to the stimulant in the cigarette, and this is why they are attracted to other stimulants.

There are a variety of explanations for why people like tobacco, such as people like to suck on the cigarettes the way a baby likes to nurse, but I think the people who like cigarettes are attracted to the stimulant. Furthermore, if we could analyze their bodies and compare them to the athletes who don't need stimulants, we might be able to figure out what is different about the cigarette smokers and why the athletes have so much more energy than the rest of us.
 

To summarize this section, whenever you look at history or current events, keep in mind that everybody's interpretation of life is biased by their personality. A lot of people are trying to convince us that it's "normal" for animals and humans to engage in pedophilia, orgies, bestiality, and homosexuality, and their supporting evidence is that we can find this type of behavior all throughout human history, and among the animals, also.

However, even if a particular type of behavior is very common for both animals and humans, that doesn't make it desirable. A good example is alcoholism, which is very common, but that doesn't justify abusing alcohol. Actually, it doesn't even justify the use of alcohol at all. A lot of people are overweight, but that doesn't justify excessive food consumption. It's possible that the majority of people are attracted to organized religions, but that doesn't justify those organizations.
 

Click here for the complete cover photo. I got tired of looking at it, so I switched to showing only the description.

In this article, Cody Beck, who wants a "zoophile liberation movement", asks a very important question: "What's the point of living if we have to hide who we are?"

The zoophiles, homosexuals, and pedophiles should not hide! Instead, they should be open and honest about themselves, just like people with other problems, such as crooked teeth, baldness, birthmarks, and bad eyesight. Scientists should try to understand the problems that the human race is suffering from. (Here is a man who is in love with a dolphin.)

An extreme example might help you understand this concept. Imagine if people with bad eyesight had been hiding this problem so well that nobody knew this problem existed, and the people with bad eyesight didn't realize that there were lots of other people with the same problem. In such a case, eyeglasses never would have been developed.

Now imagine the opposite extreme. Imagine that we have complete records on everybody's life from the moment they are conceived. Imagine that everybody is connected to medical devices that constantly transmit heartbeat, blood sugar, and other medical data to a computer, and that we know everybody's food consumption, sleeping habits, bathroom habits, and exercise habits. With that extreme amount of data, we might discover that some of the people with bad eyesight have genetically perfect eyes, but due to an excessive consumption of sugar, or problems with blood pressure, or some other medical disorder, the pressure in their eyeball became greater than it should be, and that in turn caused their eyeball to develop the wrong shape. In such a case, we might be able to reduce some of the bad eyesight by identifying children with that particular problem, and then changing their diet.

Secrecy hurts us. We cannot fully understand bad eyesight, homosexuality, baldness, diabetes, or other problems until we can create a society in which people are honest about themselves and their lives. We have to examine humans the same way we examine rocks, trees, and animals. The people who are secretive are like dirt in a transmission. They are interfering with medical progress and our understanding of the human race. They are also deceiving us about what they are, and that can result in us becoming their friends or spouse. They are destructive people who should be removed from society.

We should encourage everybody to admit to and try to understand their particular problems rather than pretend they are perfect. Nobody benefits by forcing people with mental, physical, or sexual problems to hide their defects and deceive us into thinking that they are perfect. Imagine if homosexuality is hereditary. In such a case, pressuring homosexuals into getting married and having children would be making the problem worse!

We have to suppress or remove the religious fanatics who promote the nonsense that the defective people are possessed by the devil. And we have to suppress the social scientists who claim that defective people can be cured through beatings, jail, or counseling. We have to face the fact that all humans, animals, and plants are defective, but we differ in the type and severity of defects that we suffer from. There is no perfection with living creatures. Our goal should be to understand and reduce the defects.

Homosexuals, zoophiles, pedophiles, and other people who have serious sexual disorders should stop pretending that they are "normal", and they should stop asking for liberation, and they should stop looking for justification for their behavior. They should accept the sad fact that they have something seriously wrong with them, and they should hope that scientists can figure out how to reduce the problem.

As I mentioned in Part 7, the manner in which we present an activity can make the difference between whether we are interested in it or repelled by it. For example, if ugly exercise equipment is provided in an ugly, noisy, stinky gymnasium in an ugly part of the city, and if traveling to the gymnasium is unpleasant, then most people would avoid it. And imagine if crime was so extreme that getting into the building required filling out forms and going through security checks and x-ray machines.

In order to get people interested in exercises and games, we have to make the activities appealing. We can't simply put a feed bag over someone's face and expect him to start eating. I think humans have the creativity to figure out how to create some recreational facilities that are so appealing that we enjoy going to them, and I also think that we could devise some exercises and games that are a bit more beneficial than simply providing exercise. Even if the benefit is trivial, any benefit is better than none. For a simple example, consider the people who currently exercise in a manner that does nothing of value, such as jogging around the city streets, or swimming back and forth in a swimming pool, or using some type of exercise equipment. These people usually get so bored that some of them watch television or listen to music as they exercise. Instead of contributing something to society, they consume resources during their exercising, such as batteries or electricity.

If instead, they sometimes exercise on machines that are connected to electric generators, they could produce some electricity. It wouldn't be much electricity, but it might be enough to power their music players, which would be better than consuming batteries. So, how do we design an exercise facility that is appealing enough that people want to go to it and produce some electricity?
 

This type of recreational facility would be especially nice for mothers with young children.

Imagine a city in which there are some gardens that are enclosed in beautiful glass structures so that they have year-round protection from the weather and insects. If these facilities are attractive, people will enjoy going to them rather than forcing themselves to go. Now imagine that some high quality, attractive exercise machines are connected to electric generators so that instead of wasting the energy that the people create, they produce some electricity. People cannot produce much electricity, perhaps 10 to 50 watts, but it would be enough to power small music players or televisions. If hundreds of people combined their output, they would be able to power water fountains, geysers, and waterfalls for children to play with, and this would likely result in the children putting pressure on the adults to put more effort into their exercising, or to exercise for longer periods of time, in order to keep the fountains going. At night, even the physically weak people would be able to produce enough electricity to power some LED lights in the pools for the children.

Mothers could take their children to these facilities, and the women could get some exercise while their children are playing. Some women might find this to be less boring than swimming laps, or jogging on a city street, or exercising at home. Even women who don't have their own children, or whose children are fully grown, may enjoy exercising in these facilities once in a while. These facilities could also provide swimming areas for adults, as well as food, saunas, or whatever people wanted.

This type of recreational facility would be useful to society because it would encourage the people to get some exercise, and the people would produce electricity instead of consume it. They would produce a trivial amount of electricity, but anything is better than none. Furthermore, exercise is boring, so in addition to listening to music or watching television, the people could entertain themselves by watching the children.

If we combine this concept with my concept of a "City of Castles", then every castle would have one or more recreational facility, and there would also be facilities in the city for the office and factory workers. All of these facilities would be operated by the city, so you could walk into any of them at any time you please. The facilities within the castles would be mainly for women and children, and the facilities in the city would be mainly for adults. With this type of city, it would be easy for everybody to get to one of the facilities by taking a short walk, or a short ride on a bicycle or train.

It would be so convenient to get to these facilities that a person could stop by for a short visit more than once during the day. In fact, if a person had to walk past one of these facilities on his way to his job or to a restaurant, he could stop by for just a few minutes of exercise, and then continue on his way. Compare that to the situation today in which some people in the suburbs have to travel long distances to get to a recreational facility.

Another advantage to providing a lot of high-quality exercise machines is that some people need specific types of exercise because of their job, or because of injuries, or because they are recuperating from a surgery, or because of defects with their body. For example, some people may benefit from specific exercises for their back, neck, or wrists. Having easy access to a variety of high quality machines would make it more likely that people get the specific exercise they need.

Women might find it especially easy to exercise and analyze their body when their children are within the facility.

The exercise machines could provide sensors to monitor heart rate, blood pressure, brain activity or whatever people were interested in observing. This would be especially useful for people who want to determine how sleep, diet, weather, and other factors affect their body. Some parents might find it useful to occasionally observe their children. Schools could occasionally take children to these facilities to help them understand themselves, and to help teachers identify physical problems with the children.

A person who regularly analyzes his physical activities with these machines might be able to notice small variations in his physical abilities, and that would help him to understand how subtle environmental changes can affect his body. For an example of what somebody might be interested in studying, I mentioned in a previous file that some people have reactions to food that are so mild that they haven't noticed that they have a problem. When you exercise on a machine that is collecting data about your body, and which you are producing electricity with, it's easy for you to build a database of your power output and medical data, and this can make it easier for you to notice if your abilities diminish after eating certain types of foods, or during certain types of weather, or when certain types of pollen counts are high.

I also mentioned in another file that hot peppers seem to be capable of suppressing pre-skin cancers, but what other effects does that particular chemical have? Does it affect our total energy production, peak power, heartbeat, blood pressure, perspiration, or body weight? Also, is the dried chili powder the same as fresh peppers? Is there only one chemical that has this effect? Or is it a group of chemicals? Do those chemicals have an effect on the healing of bruises or cuts? Do they help or interfere with the development of muscles?
 

It's not practical for people of different ages and physical abilities to exercise together when they are swimming, jogging, or riding bicycles. However, exercise machines are easily adjusted to fit a person's physical abilities. Therefore, by creating a variety of these machines, and by making them easy to slide around, and by putting them into a quiet, garden setting (as in the image above, but without the children), then people would be able to move some machines together and carry on conversations while they exercise. Compare that to the situation we have right now in which people sometimes try to socialize while riding bicycles side-by-side, which creates a nuisance for other people, especially automobile drivers.

Furthermore, this type of exercise facility would allow families, groups of friends, and groups of people from a business or school, to get together to exercise and socialize, or have serious discussions. A person who gets plenty of exercise during his job could set his machine to a very low level, or if he didn't want to exercise, he could just move a chair and/or a table over to the people and join the conversation.
 

As you read my suggestions about exercises and sports, keep in mind that I'm simply making suggestions to inspire you into thinking about some of our possibilities. All of our current activities developed inadvertently and haphazardly, and we can certainly improve upon total chaos. All we have to do is make the decision to take control of our culture and start experimenting!
 

The human mind certainly has the creativity to develop games that are more useful than Monopoly, chess, and checkers. Certainly we can develop games that teach us something useful, or help us to socialize, or help us develop skills.

Some people believe that chess, checkers, and other games are providing their mind with "mental stimulation", and that this helps their mind grow or develop. However, before we promote the theory that these games are helping us, we should look for some evidence because it's possible that they don't actually provide anything of value. Children enjoy these games, but children have such simplistic minds that they can entertain themselves for hours with a cardboard box. Just because children enjoy something doesn't mean that they are benefiting from it.

I think humans have the ability to develop mental games that are much more useful to both children and adults. For example, since adults have a difficult time talking to children about sex and bodily functions, perhaps we can turn that issue into a game so that children learn about those issues while having fun. I would also bet that humans have the creativity to devise some mental games for adults that are useful to us, such as helping us to learn something about history or science, or helping us to socialize. I would bet that future generations will develop much better games and come to the conclusion that our existing games, such as chess and checkers, are so worthless that they abandon them.
 

Every society today expects people to purchase their own recreational equipment. Parents usually purchase inexpensive items for their children, and more expensive items for themselves. However, since most people play games only occasionally, most of these items sit idle in people's homes, sometimes for decades. Furthermore, because the games have to be affordable, they are frequently ugly, delicate, and have limited value. However, when society takes control of recreational activities, then the cost is less significant, so the games can be made of better materials. Also, if they are educational games, they can have access to enormous amounts of information.

For example, consider the educational game, Trivial Pursuit. In order to make that game affordable, it is made out of paper and plastic, and the information is very limited. A city would be able to offer a version of that game that used something equivalent to small, hand-held computer monitors, and the game could have a radio connection to the city's database. This would give people access to phenomenal amounts of historical information, and even information about themselves. This would allow people to play games about their own lives. That type of game might be especially fun for children. For example, instead of parents having a birthday party for their child in their own home, they could take the children to one of the recreational facilities, and then the children could play this type of game about the child who is having the birthday, or about all of the children at the party. And since the game could have computer monitors, they would be able to look at video and photos of themselves.

Our city could provide us with a wide variety of high quality recreational items.

If we change society and our economic system so that the city provides us with lots of different types of recreational and exercise facilities, then we wouldn't have to purchase anything, except for personal items, such as clothing, and we wouldn't have to store any equipment inside our homes. Since the equipment would be designed for public use, it would be built to a higher quality standard, and the city would offer more variations for different ages and purposes. When you wanted to go for a bicycle ride, try rollerskating, or go camping, you would go to one of the recreational facilities, look over a variety of high-quality items, and borrow whatever equipment you wanted to use. You also wouldn't need to bother having parties for your children at your own home. You could use the recreational facilities.

This concept fits with my "City of Castles" philosophy in which society would be designed to encourage people to get out of their homes and enjoy the forests, creeks, restaurants, gardens, social activities, and the people. The homes in these type of cities would be primarily for sleeping and relaxing rather than for isolating ourselves from other people and accumulating material items.
 

Is it practical for a city to provide us with plenty of large, glass-enclosed gardens and pools simply for games and exercise? Can we afford to provide attractive exercise equipment that has medical monitoring sensors? Can we provide ourselves with facilities that give us a wide variety of high-quality bicycles, camping equipment, games, and other recreational supplies?

During prehistoric times, everybody had to spend their time finding food, but today only a small fraction of the population is needed to provide all of us with food, electricity, homes, and other basic necessities. The majority of people today could be working on luxuries, such as making beautiful cities. All we have to do is change attitudes and society. If we can fake a man on the moon, we can make a nice city for ourselves.

For example, in 2007, the Creation Museum opened, and it was so popular that a lot of people are now planning to spend a lot of money on a large amusement park that has a very large model of Noah's Ark. It's going to take a lot of people and resources to create this park, and the end result will be a miniature version of my City of Castles in which attractive buildings are mixed with lakes, gardens, pathways, and forests. However, instead of living in the city, people will visit in order to expose themselves and their children to religious propaganda, and to purchase worthless gifts.

If we had better people in this nation, then we could be putting our resources into something useful. Furthermore, as I pointed out in Part 7 of the series, if we had proper government officials, they could be arranging for arts and crafts activities that do something useful for society, such as helping with the production and maintenance of recreational facilities. There are a lot of people who want to do something useful during their leisure time. All we need are some respectable and honest people in leadership positions who have a true desire to do something useful for society rather than exploit, manipulate, and abuse us.

As I've pointed out in other files, our problems are not due to a lack of technology, or a shortage of oil. Rather, the problems we suffer from are due to the destructive, parasitic, diabolical, and disgusting people who dominate society. We will create a better society as soon as we deal with those awful people.
 

At the moment, if a city were to create the type of recreational facilities that I described, they would be vandalized and abused. It would also attract pedophiles. However, I'm discussing the potential that the human race has, I'm not discussing what we can do right now with the criminals, psychos, and sheeple that dominate the planet today. I'm discussing an imaginary city in which the police are honest, the citizens are responsible, and the government is respectable. I'm discussing what could be, not what it is right now.

Many people are sloppy with their homes and automobiles, and they are even sloppier with items that don't belong to them. Supermarket employees have to constantly put items back in their proper location because there are so many people who abandon an item when they decide they don't want to purchase it. Retail stores that sell clothing spend an enormous amount of time putting the clothing back where it belongs. In some cases, the clothing stores are to blame because they put the clothing into piles that make it very difficult for us to look through without making a mess. However, even when the clothing is arranged nicely on hangers, a lot of people refuse to replace the clothing properly. Most people also have no concern about making a mess in public bathrooms, either. And some people dump garbage along the side of the road.

Everybody inadvertently makes a mess simply by living. For example, we drop hairs, skin cells, and lint  everywhere we go, and everything we touch ends up with oil from our fingers. Sometimes we accidentally leave a mess because we didn't notice. However, if we compare everybody's messes, we would discover that some people consistently make more of a mess than others. Some of these people are deliberately ignoring their mess, and some people are making more of a mess inadvertently simply because they are stupid or don't pay much attention to what they are doing.

Because we inadvertently make a mess simply by living, public areas need routine cleaning. However, some people use this as justification for leaving a mess in a public area. In other words, they leave a mess in a public area and justify it on the grounds that the employees regularly clean the area anyway, so why should they bother cleaning it? This argument makes sense when a person is dropping hairs and lint, but we have to make a distinction between when a person is leaving an "ordinary" mess, and when he is simply looking for an excuse to be an irresponsible slob and a burden on society.

Imagine a child who leaves a big mess in his house and justifies it on the grounds that his mother regularly cleans the house, so there's no sense in him cleaning up his mess. This argument makes sense when the child is simply dropping hairs and lint, but if he is leaving clothing scattered around the house and mud on the furniture, then he is adding an additional burden on his mother.

I've also heard some people justify the mess they make as a result of their being too important and/or too busy to clean up after themselves, but they have plenty of time to be responsible. Most of them spend many hours each day sitting in front of a television, getting drunk, or "loving" their dog. Those people are simply looking for excuses for avoid cleaning up their mess.
 

Some of us Americans can face the fact that the inscription at the base of the Statue of Liberty is accurate; that many of us are descendants of Europe's "Wretched Refuse" and "Huddled Masses." However, instead of feeling sorry for ourselves or our ancestors, we are trying to be better than our crummy ancestors.

Also, some of us can face the fact that one of the unfortunate aspects of genetics is that if a couple were to have a lot of children, about half of the children would be worse overall than their parents. Another way to look at this issue is that most of the children would be similar to or worse than their parents, and only a small percentage would be an improvement. However, most parents boast about their children being "better than average". Therefore, we also need to be able to treat our own relatives the same way we treat other people's relatives. We can't give special preference to our own children.

Those of us who are better than our relatives have to be capable of turning our back on them, walking away, and getting together with better people to create a better world. We can't feel sorry for the "Underdogs" or let them pull us into their miserable existence of television, pouting, hatred, alcohol, gambling, pornography, or whatever problems your particular relatives suffer from.

The people who refer to themselves as "liberals" tend to feel sorry for themselves and blame the world's problems on rich people, and the people who refer to themselves as "conservatives" tend to blame the world's problems on liberals. However, the problem with every nation is that it is dominated by people who have the emotional qualities of a primitive savage, and many people are suffering from serious mental disorders. Most people cannot have a serious discussion about the 9/11 attack, abortion, the lies about the Holocaust, the Apollo moon landing scam, euthanasia, or religion. Instead, they become hysterical, or they hide from the issue, or they get into fights.

Furthermore, crime networks can easily manipulate people with offers of money, fame, and sex. The Jews also use feminist propaganda to trick men and women into fighting with each other, and they stage terrorist attacks to trick people into hating Muslims. They also use mentally unstable people to create fights between different races. For example, have you noticed that lately a black man, Kanye West, has been getting publicity? For example, he was interviewed on television by Matt Lauer,  and Lauer introduced him with a remark that "he's back in the headlines this week". Why is Kanye West in the headlines so often? Who decides to put him in the headlines? The Jews never put me in the headlines, or Christopher Bollyn. How many of you get news coverage? Why do the Jews pick Kanye West so often?

As I pointed out before, the Jews give publicity only to people who are either members of the crime network, or one of their tools. David Duke and David Irving are good examples. Both of them are promoted as anti-Semites, but they are just Jewish tools. Likewise, Kanye West is just an African version of David Duke. However, instead of using Kanye West as an anti-Semite, they use him to stir up racial fights and to give black people a bad image. Kanye West is a fool; a sucker; a disgrace. The Africans should complain that they're tired of Jews using weird black people to ruin their image and to instigate racial fights.

If there are enough high-quality people in America, then all we have to do is put them in control, and this nation will be transformed into something that is truly spectacular. This concept applies to other nations, also. China's primary problem is not Japan or India; it is the Chinese people. In fact, now that China has lots of automobiles, they are starting to discover that the primary cause of physical injuries and deaths in every nation are automobiles. (Here are excerpts of security camera video of intersections in China.)
 

Update Jan 2012: YouTube deleted that security camera video on the grounds that it was a violation of their policy on violence! However, it is just as well because the Chinese government created this, much better video in an attempt to help their citizens realize how serious this problem is. Of course, only some citizens will benefit from this type of information. This video is equivalent to the attempts to stop drug use by showing photos of people who abuse drugs, or the attempts to stop crime by showing people jail cells or execution chambers. We can provide information to people, but we can't cure them of their bad behavior.

Soon everybody in China will know of somebody who has been permanently injured or killed from automobiles, as seems to be the case here in America. However, the Americans are still refusing to care about this suffering. If we could put better people in control of America, China, or other nations, then we could start developing better cities and better transportation systems, and we could reduce one of the biggest sources of serious injuries in our lives.
 

I'm using the word "game" to refer to competitive activities that we play for exercise and entertainment, such as when we have casual games of volleyball, baseball, or badminton. These type of games will probably be popular for centuries, but in this section I'd like to point out that I think if we start experimenting, we could create games for teams of people in different age groups or physical abilities, and we can even create games that have some value to society.

As I pointed out in Part 7, we like to compete with each other, but our emotions don't care what the competition is. This enables us to design competitions that have some value. A simple example are those exercise machines I mentioned earlier in which people are generating electricity. We could use those machines for games, also. Instead of simply exercising on a machine, we could arrange the machines so that we are competing with each other. It might seem silly to compete on an exercise machine, but by taking advantage of our desire to compete with each other, we can make the exercising less boring.

Some exercises, such as jogging, are not practical for groups of people of different abilities. Exercise machines would enable them to be together.

Furthermore, these exercise machines make it possible for groups of people to compete, even if the members are of different ages and physical abilities. For example, families could compete against other families. The members of each family would combine their power output, and so they would be competing to see which family could produce the most power. Each of the family members would have a different machine depending upon their age, desires, and physical abilities. Teams of employees could get together for a picnic at one of the recreational facilities, and then compete against other teams of employees, either from the same business, or from other businesses. People in one neighborhood could compete against people from another neighborhood.

The idea of people playing games with exercise machines and producing electricity might seem ridiculous. Some people might respond that they would rather play volleyball or soccer. However, as I said before, the presentation of the game is very significant. I think if we were to design some beautiful gardens that are enclosed in beautiful glass structures, and if we were to design some attractive exercise machines and put them into these parks along with picnic facilities and restaurants, then groups of people would enjoy getting together for lunch or dinner in these areas, and some people might occasionally play games on these machines. In addition to getting some exercise, they would be able to socialize. They would also be able to monitor their heart rate or blood pressure, and they could produce a little electricity in the process. There will certainly be times when people want to go for a bicycle ride or play a game of volleyball, but whether playing a game with exercise machines is boring depends upon what you consider "boring".

Some people may ask, "How can producing electricity be fun?" I would respond by asking: "What is the difference between men running around a track in order to "catch" a plastic trophy, and dogs running around to catch a plastic bone?"

Some people like to play soccer, and some like to play basketball, and some people like running around an oval track. I'm not suggesting that we force anybody to engage in any particular game. I'm simply suggesting that we start experimenting with different types of exercise and recreational activities.
 

We could set up games to produce food with muscle power, and children could encourage the players by complaining that they're hungry.

For an example, some of the people involved with the arts and crafts activities could put together some simple, old-fashioned stone grinding equipment, and we could make a game out of grinding grains with only our muscle power, and then mixing the flour into dough, again only with our muscles. This type of game would give people a lot of exercise, and it would provide everybody with fresh bread. 

Another year the athletes could compete to crush oranges into juice using only their muscles as a power source. 
Other contests could require the athletes to use their muscles to grind meat into sausage. To prevent boredom, we could change these type of games constantly. For example, the next time the people got together, they could compete to crush oranges or apples into juice using only their muscles as a power source. On another day, they could use their muscles to grind meat for sausages.

There are some speculations that grape seeds and skins contain chemicals that are beneficial to human health, and if this turns out to be accurate, then we could have a game in which the players crush grapes, extract the seeds, and then crush the seeds for use in some type of food product.

There are sports events and video games for racing lawnmowers.

We could also try some games in which people assist with the maintenance of the recreational facilities, such as by giving each person a little section of the garden, and then they compete to trim the branches, or mow the grass as quickly as possible. It's not easy to believe that people would want to make a game out of gardening, but many people want exercise, and we all love to compete, so I think that it's possible for us to devise some games in such a manner that when people are in the recreational facilities, they could be encouraged to get together and compete to do a small amount of gardening to help maintain the recreational area. There is already a United States Lawn Mower Racing Association, but all they do is arrange for people to race lawnmowers around an oval track. Why not do something useful instead of driving around in ovals?

As I pointed out in Part 7, none of us are interested in doing anything useful for society as of today because we dislike the people that we live with. Actually, a lot of us are becoming increasingly angry and disgusted with the people we live with as we learn more about the crimes that are going on. Not many of us want to get together for a game of gardening or crushing oranges into juice. Instead, we are fantasizing about getting together to get rid of criminals. However, in the future, when people are living in cities in which they like and respect one another, I think it would be possible for them to create games in which they get together for a brief competition of mowing a section of a lawn or planting some flowers.

We have a tendency to ignore crimes that don't seem to affect us, but we are gears in a machine, so crimes that don't seem to have any effect on your life are indirectly affecting you. I'll use Bristol Palin as an example because I'm somewhat familiar with her situation. Also, her situation is not  trivial because it has some connection to her mother and our government. She is also an example of how a mysterious crime network that is dominated by Jews is using television programs, athletes, dancers, singers, and other people to manipulate the public and our government. Become aware of these crimes so that you can learn the tricks that the criminals are using, and so that you can help people to resist the intimidation and propaganda. Furthermore, you should consider what television could be if we get these criminals out of it, and consider what sports, singing, and dancing could be. 

While Bristol Palin was on the television show Dancing with the Stars during 2010, there were a lot of people on the Internet encouraging everybody to vote for her. One person boasted that he voted for 3 hours and voted 300 times. Paul Kengor, a professor of political science, encouraged voting for Bristol Palin with his article that begins with:

A Vote For Bristol Palin on Dancing With the Stars is Pro-Life
Tonight, I plan to do two things I’ve never done before and will hopefully never do again: I will watch Dancing with the Stars and send a text message — actually, a bunch of text messages. The occasion, of course, is Bristol Palin...

It's possible that the voting software ignored all of the excess votes, but the success or failure of their attempt to manipulate the event is not the issue I want to bring to your attention. Rather, I want to point out that a person who was watching that particular television show would have to be incredibly stupid and/or not paying any attention to American politics to not see that there was a deliberate attempt by a lot of people to promote Bristol Palin. It should be obvious that some mysterious, secretive group of people deliberately got rid of Brandy Norwood and Audrina Patridge because those two young women had tremendous potential, and that they were hoping Jennifer Grey would suffer physical problems near the end of the competition. (They may have also been planning to sabotage her.)

However, I have the impression that Bristol Palin was truly unaware of why so many people were angry and disgusted that she was winning. She doesn't seem to pay much attention to politics, and she may not even have the intelligence necessary to understand that she was being used as a pawn to manipulate the American people. She is an example of what I mentioned in this previous file; specifically, stupid and gullible people are dangerous because they may be involved with crime networks without realizing it. You should consider them to be like that character Pigpen in the Peanuts comic strip.

That television show is not entertainment, and it's not a sports event, and it's not a game. It is just another method of making money and manipulating us with political and Jewish propaganda. It could be described as Promoting Propaganda with the Stars, or Manipulating the Sheeple with the Stars.

Don't assume that my complaints apply only to that particular television show. I only get one television channel, namely ABC, and the others I have to watch on the Internet. Also, most of the television shows irritate me so much that I don't want to watch them. As a result, I am familiar with only a few television shows. However, my complaints apply to virtually all television shows, movies, books, magazines, and theatrical productions. I'm simply using certain people and television shows as examples.

Bristol Palin was often upset, but did her mother or her friends care?

A lot of people can see that Bristol Palin was being used in some diabolical conspiracy, but who was using her? And why? Was her mother and/or father involved, also?

Tom Bergeron, the main host of Dancing with the Stars, describes himself as a "liberal Democrat", so why would he defend the attempt to promote Sarah Palin? It's possible that he had no choice since he is a host of the show, but it's also possible that the Democrats want Sarah Palin to be the presidential candidate in 2012 because they assume they will be able to beat her. If most of the people behind the conspiracy to promote Bristol Palin were doing so to set her mother up for failure, then it would be even more sad than if she had been promoted by people who admired her mother.
 

I don't want to create the impression that I care about Bristol Palin. I don't know enough about her or her family to pass judgment on whether we should care about her. If it turns out that her family are members of that horrible, international Jewish crime network, then Bristol is just the offspring of dangerous criminals. Our current attitude is that when we arrest or execute dangerous criminals, we should protect their children, but I think we should take a close look at the children of criminals and pass judgment on whether we want them living with us. The religious fanatics promote the theory that all children are beautiful creations of a loving God, but we should face the fact that children inherit qualities from their parents.

The reason I mention specific people and specific television shows is to give examples of how we are allowing criminals to get control of television, schools, holidays, government agencies, police departments, and businesses. We can't ignore criminals. People in modern society are gears in a machine, and we must remove the gears that are destroying the machine. We must stop feeling sorry for those mythical "Underdogs" and "disadvantaged people". We must remove all of the destructive and parasitic people. Our goal should be to create a society that we enjoy, and to live among people we are proud of. We shouldn't be afraid of or disgusted with the people we live with.

None of us is "perfect"; we all have defects and limitations. Everybody should learn about themselves, find a way to deal with their problems, and behave in a respectable manner. The people who use their problems to feel sorry for themselves and justify destructive or parasitic behavior should be removed. Don't feel sorry for them!
 

Tom Bergeron, of Dancing with the Stars, defended the suspicious success of Bristol Palin with some rude and intimidating remarks when he pointed out that people who don't vote have no right to complain. This is a very common argument that I hear during every political election. Since I don't vote, I'm frequently told by people who do vote that I have no right to complain. However, we cannot vote for the winner of the Nobel prizes, Academy Awards, or the Pulitzer Prizeso does that mean we are not allowed to complain that Al Gore wins these and other prizes? None of us have any votes in regards to Queen Elizabeth or the royal families of the world, so does that mean we are not allowed to complain about any of these monarchies?

When we don't vote in the dishonest, secretive, anonymous voting systems, then the criminals tell us that we have no right to complain, but if we do vote, then the criminals tell us to quietly accept the results of our actions. However, we can form opinions on any issue, and we can complain about any type of corruption, regardless of whether we vote. Don't let the criminals intimidate you into remaining silent about their crimes!
 

The "sheeple" often get together to watch television, have dinner, shop, have a birthday party, or go to an amusement park. They have informal discussions at all of these events. However, even though the situation has improved during the past few years, when I and other people try to discuss the lies about the 9/11 attack, we would be reprimanded for bringing up an issue that is inappropriate. However, those sheeple did not consider it inappropriate for themselves to promote religious nonsense, political propaganda, or Jewish lies about Muslim terrorists or the Holocaust.

The sheeple don't want us to expose crimes because they don't want to deal with problems. They want to entertain themselves. They reprimand us when we put pressure on them to become responsible humans. They want to behave like spoiled, bratty children. My advice is to let people know about these issues, and when you encounter somebody who complains about you or ignores you, try to determine whether they are criminals or sheeple. If they are criminals, keep track of them, and if they are sheeple, don't let them ruin your morale or intimidate you.