It's so hard to read articles for the lowest common denominator. This guy begins by saying he doesnt know what a bay leaf is. He continues that he's inspired by the message of SFAH that 'anyone can cook anything and make it yummms', which is a complete rubbish of a premise. In the bin this article goes like most of the atlantics writing.
The real story of Laurel Canyon was written by Dave McGowan and it goes into great detail of how the hippie counter culture and music scene was completely created by the MIC. Anything saying anything else is just propaganda.
I was sold on McGowan's piece until I read his work on the moon landings, which was utter raving nonsense. I was much less sold after that.
But I think it's still fair to question the extent to which psychedelia and pro-peace (as opposed to anti-war) culture was deliberately seeded and manufactured - in the same way that abstract art and music were promoted to intellectuals by the US primarily for nationalistic and political reasons.
It's always important to know when someone is out of their specialty. The researcher I practically worship on a particular subject once wrote a defence of something I personally know to be complete nonsense because I was there and know what happened.
Dave's Laurel Canyon piece is meticulously researched and he's in his specialty. He's wrong about the moon landings.
Good reminder! Also to mention: When researchers research about some new Magical thing, they need to also come up with potential applications to continue receiving funding, prospective interests, get publicity, etc.
It is very possible that this article could be nothing more than: Researchers unveil new nano-material with high strength properties, cite concrete as a possible application supplement.
Fake news! The most obvious give aways in the title being planet and orbits. Earth is not a planet but a plane and it doesn't orbit anything as it is stationary.
