July 18, 2018 By Joseph P. Farrell

Mr. B. spotted this intriguing article, and given yesterday's blog about mind control, its apparent growing use globally, and the "missing trillions", I had to blog about this one. The upshot is that some major bank studies by Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America Merrill Lynch have concluded that by 2040, the space industry will approach between one and almost three trillion dollars of market value; here's the article:

A trillion-dollar space industry will require new markets

Now, if you read through all that, you might be thinking, "Well, so what? This is more or less old news and we already knew space industry was going to be a 'big thing'. No news here."

I have to admit, that was pretty much my own reaction when I read it. So I went back and read it again, and that's when the big "but..." hit me. It was not what the article was saying, but rather, what it was either not saying, or merely alluding to. Here's the passages that leapt out at me, and which occasion our high octane speculationTM of the day:

Autry, though, cautioned not to be too specific about what markets might emerge to drive the growth of the overall space economy, recounting his experience in the early computer industry, where games played a much larger role than many initially expected.

“I think we haven’t seen yet what that app is on the NewSpace side,” he said. “I’m confident that it’s there, but I think the most important thing we need to do is not try too much to define the roadmap. There’s going to be some really unexpected detours, and it’ll be interesting to see what they are.”

So what is not being said, and what is only being alluded to? For the former, it's the markets themselves. Regular readers here have probably seen and read all those articles about the estimated worth of this or that asteroid's resources, with figures usually being placed in the quadrillions of dollars. The only problem is one has to go out and get them. But in those articles, the point is usually made that such a sudden influx of money and resources could adversely impact the world's economy; think of Spain after the discovery of the New World, with galleons bringing back boatloads of gold. The result of the influx of so much bullion drove up the prices of everything in Spain, and as a result, manufacturing fled to places with lower costs of doing business, like the Spanish Netherlands, whose economy "took off" as a direct result of the crash of Spanish manufacturing. Spain ended up losing its manufacturing base and suffering the consequences until the twentieth century.

But that, of course, was only true because there was no expansion of markets... which raises the question, why then go out and mine all those asteroids? Are all those quadrillions being collateralized to offsets all the quadrillions of derivatives on the books? I've suggested as much in other blogs. I've also suggested, along with Catherine Austin Fitts, that all that missing money might literally be going off planet, into some sort of very hidden market and trade with, or perhaps even tribute to... well, with "whomever."

In other words, the article's reference to not being "too specific about what markets might emerge" might be taken as an indicator that those "emerging markets" are not on this planet at all.

And that brings us to high octane speculation number two. The final statement of the article - "There's going to be some really unexpected detours, and it will be interesting to see what they are."(Emphasis added)  Indeed, one such "really unexpected detours" might indeed be an interplanetary "market" and "trade" with "whomever."

To put it country simple: I suspect a whole lot of discussion took place "off the record" at this conference, and that the real concerns are precisely how to deal with precisely such circumstances, and how to break "the news." Commerce, or tribute, might indeed be the agenda that drives "disclosure."

See you on the flip side...