• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

Joe Firmage: The Two Hundred Million Dollar Man

Are Some Integral Celebs Involved in a Huge Money Scam?

Frank Visser / NotebookLM

Disclaimer: This is a report on an ongoing law case, involving some integral people, from the point of view of both the plaintiffs and the defendants. A future jury is to decide on the merits of the respective arguments (expected late 2025/early 2026). Clean Up and Show Up!

Summary by NotebookLM: The article by Frank Visser on IntegralWorld describes a lawsuit against Joe Firmage, a once-successful internet entrepreneur, for large-scale investment fraud. Firmage, previously known for his interest in UFOs and alternative science, claimed to have developed a revolutionary propulsion technology. This attracted investors, including prominent figures from Ken Wilber's "Integral" philosophy circle, based on false promises of government contracts.
The case accuses Firmage and his associates, including Robert Richards and, to a lesser extent, Ken Wilber, of running a Ponzi scheme. The article examines the allegations, the individuals involved, and Wilber's potential role. Visser advocates for transparency and integrity within the Integral community while questioning the naivety or complicity of the investors involved.

Millions and Aliens

When I visited Ken Wilber in 1997 he mentioned that some time earlier a couple of business philanthropists showed up at his doorstep, announcing that they had a huge amount of money to spend, for idealistic goals. If he by any chance knew a worthy cause. Wilber frantically tried to think of useful projects that could further the integral worldview, such as an Integral Nobel Prize, or funding various integral research projects, and so on. Between 1997 and the Spring of 2000 the internet bubble grew to huge proportions, and the sky was the limit for any digital entrepreneurs. But then the bubble burst, and most of the pledged funds evaporated. Only one person remained, Joe Firmage, a multi-millionaire before his 30's, who felt affinity with Wilber's ideas. As we read on an older version of the Integral Institute website: "Joe Firmage, who was invited to several of these meetings, announced that "there is nothing anywhere in the world that is doing what Integral Institute is doing," and then promptly donated a million dollars in cash. With that donation, Integral Institute was formally launched."[1] In a later version this sentence was removed.

Integral Institute spent this money on creating several divisions (Integral Business, Integral Politics, Integral Psychology, and so on), and inviting scientists to various meetings. I attended one of these meetings (if I remember correctly it was the Integral Education group in 2001) and Firmage was present there as well. Wilber announced plans to create a website called "Cosmos", after the famous television series presented by Carl Sagan. As soon as it would have an established audience, other, typically integral ingredients could be added to the mix. I expressed some skepticism, for being in the internet advertising industry myself (working for Intel Corporation), I knew that the messaging should be right from the start. Either the message is, we follow hard science, or it is: science has more dimensions than only that of physics. But I more or less stood alone in this, at least nobody else shared these feelings publically. As you might expect, the funds burnt out at a terrifying rate, and the Integral Institute never really got off the ground. Firmage, it seemed, disappeared from the integral scene.

One thing to know about Firmage is that from a very young age on he was interested in UFOs, other dimensions and space travel. When he headed USWeb, one of the first web agencies that helped large companies go online, he experienced an alien encounter when laying in bed early in the morning.[2] He suddenly saw a "bearded gentleman with a dark brown head of hair" and talked to him about space travel and said he wanted "to die for it". The figure then "produced a sphere, an electric blue ball about the size of a cantaloupe, which entered Firmage's body, taking command of his muscles and producing unimaginable waves of uber-orgasmic ecstasy." As you may understand, when he went public with this experience, his job at USWeb was over, which he accepted. He frantically started working on a book simply called The Truth, totalling over 500 pages, which more or less described his worldview.[3] Of course, the title alone of such a book should raise red flags: only pseudo-scientists talk in these terms (like "The Secret").

Integral Investment Fraud?

Then, earlier this week, the name of Joe Firmage popped up again. I understood he was somehow in serious legal trouble. And some prominent persons from the integral community were implicated. At the moment, Firmage is in jail, for another crime, but is facing far stronger accusations. What has happened? A search on the web resulted in only two background stories, both from February 2024.[4][5] Further search led me to the original legal document.[6] We see a number of plaintiffs, and a number of defendants (individuals and companies, most of Joe Firmage, but one is an integral company called Integral Initiatives LLC, based in Denver). This is a 60 page document written in legalese, so I ran it through AI of NotebookLM to capture the main points of contention.

• Summary
• The people involved
• The fraudulent actions
• The role played by Joe Firmage
• The role played by Bob Richards
• The role played by Ken Wilber

NotebookLM:

Summary

This document is a complaint filed in a U.S. court on behalf of multiple plaintiffs against Joseph P. Firmage and various associated individuals and entities. The plaintiffs accuse the defendants of large-scale fraud related to investments in Firmage's "Lab Project," a purported effort to develop revolutionary propulsion technology.

The complaint details how the defendants, including prominent figures from the Integral Theory Community, disseminated false information about the project's progress and the awarding of lucrative government contracts to attract investors. The plaintiffs allege significant financial losses and seek compensation on various legal grounds, including securities fraud, the sale of unregistered securities, and breach of contract.

The document provides a detailed account of the alleged deception, the parties involved, and the financial transactions, demanding restitution of their investments, lost profits, and punitive damages.

Key Individuals and Their Roles in the Lawsuit Against Joseph P. Firmage

This lawsuit centers on an alleged Ponzi scheme involving Joseph P. Firmage's Lab Project. Below are the key individuals involved and their roles in this scheme:

Joseph P. Firmage

Leader of the company, claiming to have invented a radically new propulsion technology.

Manages the Lab Project, which purportedly researches and develops this technology.

Accused of soliciting investments under false pretenses, including fabricated government contracts.

Allegedly used new investments to pay off old debts and potentially fund international criminal organizations.

Robert A. Richards

Business partner of Firmage.

Assists in recruiting investors for the Lab Project, including the plaintiffs in this case.

A former investor himself who lost money in the Lab Project.

Allegedly struck a deal with Firmage to receive commissions for attracting new investors.

Kenneth E. Wilber

Writer and philosopher who founded the Integral Theory movement.

Business partner of Richards in Integral Initiatives LLC.

Involved in the Lab Project and, alongside Richards, allegedly recruited investors from the Integral Theory community.

The Plaintiffs

Individuals and entities that invested in the Lab Project between March and July 2022.

Lured in with promises of a $200 million government contract.

Received no returns on their investments and accuse the defendants of fraud.

Max Marmer serves as the lead plaintiff.

Other Key Figures

David Hestenes: Emeritus professor and theoretical physicist. Allegedly involved in promoting the Lab Project. Accused of recruiting investors despite questioning the project's scientific validity, reportedly for financial gain.

Paula Collins: A friend and business partner of Firmage. Promoted the Lab Project to investors.

Virginia Menlove: Former girlfriend of Firmage's father. [23] Managed financial transactions for the Lab Project.

Jairo Toro: A friend of Firmage. [25] Handled transactions involving investment funds and received commissions.

The plaintiffs accuse the defendants of orchestrating a Ponzi scheme, using false promises to lure investors while diverting funds away from developing the purported technology.

The Major Fraudulent Actions of Science Invests LLC

The complaint provides detailed descriptions of the fraudulent activities committed by Science Invests LLC, led by Joseph P. Firmage and Robert A. Richards. The core of the fraud centers around a purportedly groundbreaking propulsion system developed by Firmage. Below are the key fraudulent actions outlined:

Misrepresentation of the Technology

Firmage and Richards promoted the technology as revolutionary, making claims about prototypes capable of levitating and even interdimensional travel. In reality, there was no scientific basis for these claims, and the prototypes were rudimentary and nonfunctional.

Fabricated Government Contracts

To attract investors, Firmage and Richards claimed to have secured lucrative government contracts, including a $200 million contract with the Department of Defense. However, these contracts were nonexistent, and the documents presented as evidence were forged.

Exploitation of the "Integral Theory Community"

Richards and Firmage leveraged their connections with the "Integral Theory Community," a philosophical movement with a loyal following, to gain the trust of potential investors. They emphasized that many other community members, including prominent figures, had already invested.

Misappropriation of Investment Funds

Instead of using investment funds for the development of the technology, the funds were misappropriated for personal purposes, including paying off Firmage's debts and making payments to unidentified individuals and entities.

Establishment of a Ponzi Scheme

The complaint alleges that Firmage and Richards operated a Ponzi scheme, using new investments to pay earlier investors and enrich themselves. Several individuals, including Hestenes, Collins, Menlove, and Toro, were accused of participating in this scheme.

Concealment of Critical Information

Firmage and Richards failed to disclose crucial information to investors, such as the fact that previous investors had lost millions of dollars and that Firmage had a history of drug abuse, mental health issues, and financial instability.

The complaint paints a picture of systematic and coordinated fraud by Science Invests LLC, where investors were misled with false promises, and their funds were diverted for personal gain.

Joe Firmage's Role in the Alleged Fraud

Joe Firmage is described in the sources as the mastermind behind the fraudulent investment scheme surrounding his Lab Project. He claimed to have developed a revolutionary propulsion technology, complete with prototypes and a purported $200 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense.

Firmage employed several tactics to deceive investors:

Exaggerating Technological Progress

Firmage claimed to have built nine prototype machines demonstrating his technology. However, the lawsuit asserts that these prototypes did not possess the capabilities he claimed.

Fabricated Government Contracts

He alleged that he had a contract with the Department of Defense but could not provide evidence, citing its supposed "classified" nature. Firmage used this as a pretext to convince investors to fund "intellectual property rights" and "operational costs."

Intimidation and Conspiracy Theories

When investors raised concerns about delays, Firmage claimed their phones were being tapped by foreign intelligence agencies due to the value of his technology.

Involving a Respected Scientist

Firmage enlisted David Hestenes, a renowned theoretical physicist, to lend credibility to his project. Hestenes later denied any serious involvement and accused Firmage of misusing his name to attract investors.

Misappropriation of Funds

Firmage was found diverting investment funds to unknown individuals and entities, including through his father's ex-girlfriend, Virginia Menlove.

Criminal Connections

A private investigator revealed that Firmage's purported "government handler," Christopher, was likely a member of a foreign criminal organization.

Ponzi Scheme Operations

Firmage, along with his partner Bob Richards, orchestrated a Ponzi scheme, using funds from new investors to pay off earlier ones while maintaining the illusion of progress. It is also alleged that Firmage used investor money to pay off personal debts and potentially funneled funds to international criminal organizations.

Characterization of Joe Firmage

The sources depict Joe Firmage as a charismatic but deceitful figure who exaggerated technological claims, fabricated government contracts, intimidated investors, and misappropriated funds to enrich himself at others' expense.

The Role of Robert A. Richards in the Alleged Ponzi Scheme

Robert A. Richards, also known as "Bob Richards" or simply "Richards," is alleged to have played a critical role in the Ponzi scheme surrounding Joseph P. Firmage's Lab Project.

Richards is described as a former investor who lost money in the Lab Project and then conspired with Firmage to recruit new investors in an effort to recoup his own losses. He did this by receiving commissions or "kickbacks" for each new investor he brought in. Richards collaborated with other individuals and entities, particularly Kenneth E. Wilber and Integral Initiatives LLC, to carry out the scheme.

Targeting the Integral Theory Community

Richards specifically targeted members of the Integral Theory Community, a philosophical movement led by Wilber, many of whom are among the plaintiffs.

He exploited his connections within this tight-knit community to gain the trust of potential investors.

Richards positioned himself as a trustworthy, like-minded individual who sought to help his fellow "integralists."

Misleading Investors

Richards is accused of making numerous false statements and withholding critical information to deceive investors.

He endorsed Firmage's claims about government contracts, despite knowing they were false.

He assured investors of the project's viability even without government contracts.

However, he concealed the fact that he and other early investors had already lost millions in the project.

Recruiting Max Marmer

Richards is alleged to have been instrumental in recruiting Max Marmer, the lead plaintiff in the case.

He leveraged Marmer's trust in Wilber and the Integral Theory Community to persuade him to invest.

Richards is accused of orchestrating Marmer's involvement in the Ponzi scheme and pocketing a portion of Marmer's investment.

He allegedly lied about other investors' exits and bank irregularities to allay Marmer's suspicions.

Allegations of Intentional Participation

The plaintiffs allege that Richards knowingly participated in the Ponzi scheme and profited significantly at the expense of the victims.

Summary

The sources portray Robert A. Richards as a key figure in the alleged Ponzi scheme, exploiting his status and influence within the Integral Theory Community to mislead investors and enrich himself.

Ken Wilber's Role in the Alleged Fraud

Ken Wilber's exact role in the alleged fraud surrounding Joseph Firmage's Lab Project is challenging to determine based on the available sources. The complaint portrays Wilber as a passive beneficiary who profited from investments solicited by his business partner, Bob Richards, and possibly had knowledge of the project's fraudulent nature.

Business Partner of Richards

The complaint identifies Wilber as Richards' business partner in Integral Initiatives LLC, the entity that, along with Firmage, received the initial $35,000 investment. This indicates a degree of financial involvement and collaboration with Richards, who played a central role in recruiting investors.

Involvement in the Lab Project

Wilber has been involved in the Lab Project since at least September 20, 2016. Although the sources do not specify his responsibilities, his extended involvement suggests he may have been aware of developments within the project, including the alleged fraudulent activities.

Commissions and Compensation

The complaint alleges that Wilber, Richards, and Bigelow (referred to as the Integral Initiatives Parties) had agreements with Firmage to receive commissions and compensation for recruiting new investors. These arrangements were reportedly designed to recover their previous losses from earlier investments in Firmage's project. This suggests that the Integral Initiatives Parties may have been aware of the project's unsustainability and might have knowingly participated in a pyramid scheme.

Exploitation of Trust

The complaint emphasizes that Richards—and to a lesser extent, other Integral Initiatives Parties—leveraged their ties to the Integral Theory Community to build trust with potential investors. As a prominent figure within this community, Wilber may have inadvertently reinforced this trust, even if he was not directly involved in misleading investors.

Important Note

The complaint presents only one side of the story, and Wilber has denied the allegations. There is no direct evidence from the sources that Wilber actively misled investors or had specific knowledge of Firmage's fraudulent actions. The extent of his awareness and involvement in the alleged fraud remains unclear. Ultimately, the legal proceedings will determine whether Wilber bears any responsibility.

What to make of all this?

Zooming out from all these legal details (and the jury will decide on their merit), I get the impression that after the Integral Institue folded, there was a serious lack of funding for the various activities. Workshops and seminars were offered at fairly high prices, but I have no overview of its profit and losses (Integral Life seems to be thriving, but recently asked for a substantial subscription raise as well). So perhaps new ways of funding were sought. How could Wilber have been so naive? Remember that this whole idea of anti-gravity physics and interplanetary travel by new propulsion techniques most probably was equally fraudulent. The field of pseudoscience is littered with projects like this, where proto-types are announced and claimed to work, but don't live up to deeper and skeptical scrutiny.

It is a tragedy for all involved, where losses are compensated with new investments, leading to further losses. Victims become perpetrators, who look for new victims—an endless cycle of tragedies. It remains to be seen how much of the total invested sum of money can be retrieved, and the damages done can be compensated for. One source mentions a total of 25 million dollars. Firmage could persuade his victims to donate ever more money with the false promise that he had received (or was about to receive) a 200 million dollar government grant, which, if true, would of course dissolve all financial pain. Was it actually used for developing propulsion technologies at all? Compare all this to Elon Musk, who for all his excentricity at least gets his high tech rockets off the ground.

Firmage clearly misused Wilber's fame to attract investors. As to Wilber's own role in all this, the AI-summary states that "Wilber has denied the allegations". I personally can't find that information in the official complaint document, but in Appendix 2 you can read the full defendants' document. What I do know is that I have seen email exchanges between Wilber and Richards/Firmage about the amount of percentages they are supposed to receive (and apparently did not yet receive), to help funding the Integral Institute.[9] It is particularly painful to read that the late Terry Patten (co-author of Integral Life Practice, who passed away in October 2021) lost all his savings through this scam, and was urged to donate more money even when in his final days. When Max Marmer, the plaintiff, spoke with Terry's son Michael, he learned that "Defendants Richards, Wilber, and Bigelow had been involved in Firmage's scam for many years."

This implicates Wilber in no small measure, and requires a full disclosure from him about these matters. Even if he may not have been the most active member of this group, Wilber is the very reason this money scam could have been set up, given his charisma and therefore the impact he has on his students. However, if Wilber's role in this money scam is even more than casual, it is morally reprehensible for a thinker who claims to have reached extraordinary heights in human development. We are of course awaiting the jury's verdict in this case, but would very much urge him to come clear on this.

As to those who fell for this scam, even if they are clearly victims of an impostor, it is equally obvious that they went for the big money, which is at the same time naive (for not checking the physics claims) and gullible (for buying the 200 million dollar story). And to those in the integral community who have been or are still being duped by this, please step forward so that justice can be done. The reputation of Ken Wilber and his close collaborators is definitely at stake here. Integrity should be a thing in integral matters. Or is this a case of Integral Financing?

Appendix 1: Who is Joe Firmage?

Oddly, Joe Firmage does not have a Wikipedia page, an overview of his business accomplishments (and failues) after leaving USWeb is hard to find. His book The Truth is nowhere to be found on the Internet. A good profile from his early success years can be found in the Washington Post and a random profile page covers the years until 2014.[10] The 2014 science documentary Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, presented by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, was a follow-up to the 1980 television series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage, which was presented by Carl Sagan. The sequel was produced by Cosmos Studios, founded in 2000 by Ann Druyan and Joe Firmage. Druyan was co-author and co-creator of the original television series and Sagan's third wife. So he was also into orthodox astrophysics in those days. It also explains why Wilber wanted to use the name Cosmos for his new website.

As usual, ChatGPT is very helpful:

Joe Firmage is a controversial entrepreneur and technologist best known for his ambitious claims about advanced propulsion technologies and his interest in extraterrestrial life and fringe science. Born in 1970, he initially gained recognition in the tech industry during the 1990s and early 2000s. Below are key aspects of his background and career:

Early Career

Silicon Valley Success: Firmage co-founded USWeb in 1995, a pioneering internet consulting firm, which became highly successful during the dot-com boom. At its peak, the company was valued in the billions.

Departure from USWeb: In 1998, Firmage left the company after publicly sharing his belief in UFOs and extraterrestrial encounters, which led to significant media scrutiny and a tarnished reputation in mainstream business circles.

Shift to Fringe Science

Unorthodox Interests: After leaving USWeb, Firmage focused on exploring alternative scientific theories, including advanced propulsion systems and the possibility of interstellar travel.

The Truth About the Universe: He published a controversial essay in 1999 titled The Truth, where he argued that extraterrestrial civilizations have influenced humanity and that UFO sightings were evidence of their presence.

The International Academy of Science and Arts (IASA): Firmage founded this organization to research and develop cutting-edge technologies, blending his interest in physics, consciousness, and speculative science.

Lab Project and Legal Troubles

The Lab Project: Firmage spearheaded this initiative, claiming it would develop revolutionary propulsion technology capable of achieving breakthroughs in space travel. However, the project has been criticized as scientifically unfounded.

Allegations of Fraud: Firmage has faced accusations of running a Ponzi scheme, where he allegedly used new investor funds to pay off earlier ones while misrepresenting the viability of his technology. Legal proceedings have painted him as a charismatic but deceptive figure who manipulated investors with false claims of government contracts and technological advancements.

Legacy

Firmage's career illustrates the intersection of genuine technological innovation and speculative, often discredited, scientific pursuits. While his early contributions to the tech industry are notable, his later endeavors have been marred by controversy and legal challenges.

He remains a polarizing figure, with supporters praising his visionary ideas and critics dismissing him as a fraudster or pseudoscientist.

Joe Firmage, a prominent entrepreneur, has experienced significant professional successes and notable failures throughout his career.

Successes:

Serius Corporation (1989-1993): Firmage founded Serius Corporation at age 18, which developed innovative software tools. The company was sold to Novell in 1993 for $24 million. He then served as Novell's vice president of networking strategy, playing a key role in the technology industry during its formative years.

USWeb (1995): Firmage co-founded USWeb, a pioneering web services company. Under his leadership, USWeb became a $2.1 billion enterprise and a major player in the early days of the internet. Its merger with the CKS Group was a major milestone in the tech space

Failures and Controversies:

Resignation from USWeb: Firmage resigned from USWeb, citing concerns that his public advocacy of UFOs and extraterrestrial technology could harm the company's reputation. This marked a turning point in his career as he pivoted toward more controversial endeavors.

ManyOne Networks and Financial Issues: ManyOne, another of Firmage's ventures, reportedly raised significant capital but failed to deliver financial transparency or substantial results. His later ventures were criticized for lacking tangible outcomes, despite ambitious

Legal Troubles (2023): Firmage faced allegations of financial exploitation of an elderly woman and accusations of running a Ponzi-like scheme. These legal challenges marred his reputation further and highlighted difficulties in his business ventures and personal conduct.

Firmage's career reflects a mix of early triumphs in the tech industry and later struggles as his focus shifted toward controversial and speculative projects. His initial successes remain influential in the history of Silicon Valley, even as his later pursuits encountered significant challenges.

Appendix 2: The Wilber defendants answer to the complaint

On May 24, 2024, the lawyer of the Wilber defendants filed a reply in which basically all accusations were denied or considered irrelevant.[11] Important to know that Firmage did not respond to the accusations. Again, NotebookLM's AI gives the following useful summary. And beware of a true avalanche of legalese terms:

NotebookLM:

• Summary
• Defense of the Wilber Defendants
• Specific Allegations Denied by the Wilber Defendants
• Legal Grounds of the Wilber Defendants

Summary

This document is the response of the defendants (Wilber et al.) to a lawsuit filed by Marmer et al. The defendants largely deny the allegations, asserting that the plaintiffs, particularly Max Marmer, were fully informed of the investment risks. They deny any misuse of funds or abuse of their position within the "Integral Community." A significant portion of the response consists of denials of specific allegations, supplemented by a few concessions and a range of defenses, such as the statute of limitations and abuse of process. The objective is to dismiss the complaint and convince the court of the defendants' innocence.

Defense of the Wilber Defendants

The Wilber defendants, including Kenneth E. Wilber, Robert A. Richards, Colin Bigelow, Integral Initiatives, LLC, and 21C Corporation, deny the allegations made by the plaintiffs. They assert that they did not make false or misleading statements or engage in deceptive conduct regarding the propulsion technology in question.

The Wilber defendants argue that the plaintiffs, particularly Max Marmer, were fully informed about all aspects of Firmage's efforts to secure contracts with federal government agencies. They were also aware of how the plaintiffs' invested funds would be used and repaid.

The Wilber defendants deny using the plaintiffs' money for personal compensation and deny any misuse of their position within the "Integral Community" to raise funds.

Instead, the Wilber defendants claim that if the plaintiffs relied on anyone to their detriment, it was lead plaintiff Max Marmer. Marmer had numerous direct interactions with Firmage and multiple discussions with Richards, during which Richards thoroughly explained the structure, risks, and rewards of the proposed transaction, as well as potential obstacles to the investment's success.

The Wilber defendants further deny most allegations in the complaint by asserting that the claims do not pertain to them. In many cases, they argue that they lack sufficient information to confirm or deny the allegations.

As a primary defense, the Wilber defendants argue that the complaint should be dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Affirmative Defenses

The Wilber defendants also raise several affirmative defenses, including:

Waiver, Estoppel, and Unclean Hands:

The plaintiffs have waived their rights, are estopped, and have acted with unclean hands.

Mitigation and Comparative Fault:

Any damages suffered by the plaintiffs, if any, should be offset or reduced based on their own actions.

Accord and Satisfaction:

The plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrines of accord and satisfaction.

Statute of Limitations:

The plaintiffs' claims are wholly or partially barred by their own delay or the applicable statutes of limitations.

Doctrine of Laches:

The plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of laches.

Causation by Third Parties or Plaintiffs' Conduct:

Any damages suffered by the plaintiffs, if any, are the result of actions by third parties outside the control or supervision of the defendants, or the plaintiffs' own actions.

Election of Remedies:

The plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of election of remedies.

Good Faith Conduct:

All actions or omissions by the Wilber defendants were carried out in good faith, without malice or recklessness, and were entirely reasonable and justified under the circumstances.

Invalid or Unenforceable Agreements:

The plaintiffs' claims are barred to the extent they rely on invalid or unenforceable agreements.

Bad Faith Filing:

The complaint was filed in bad faith.

Proportional Liability:

Any liability of the defendants is limited to the proportion or percentage of fault attributable to each defendant.

Lack of Standing:

The plaintiffs lack standing to assert their claims in this case.

The Wilber defendants also reserve the right to amend their responses to the complaint as additional information becomes available.

Specific Allegations Denied by the Wilber Defendants

The Wilber defendants deny a wide range of specific allegations made in the complaint. These denials often take the form of assertions that the allegations do not apply to them or that they lack sufficient information to confirm or deny them. Below are some key examples:

Involvement in Propulsion Technology:

The Wilber defendants deny supporting the propulsion technology and claim they did not make false or misleading statements or engage in deceptive conduct regarding the technology.

Use of Investment Funds:

The Wilber defendants deny using the plaintiffs' investment funds for personal compensation.

Abuse of Position Within the "Integral Community":

The Wilber defendants deny exploiting their position within the "Integral Community" to raise funds.

Responsibility for Firmage's Actions:

The Wilber defendants assert that lead plaintiff Max Marmer dealt directly with Firmage and that Richards fully informed Marmer about the structure, risks, and rewards of the investment.

Knowledge of and Involvement in Specific Actions by Firmage:

The Wilber defendants deny knowledge of or involvement in many of Firmage's specific actions described in the complaint. In many cases, they claim that these allegations do not pertain to them.

In summary, the Wilber defendants reject not only the general accusations of fraud and deception but also a broad range of specific claims regarding their involvement with propulsion technology, the use of investment funds, and their interactions with the plaintiffs.

Legal Grounds of the Wilber Defendants

The Wilber defendants present a wide range of legal defenses in response to the complaint. These defenses can be categorized into two main groups: direct denials and affirmative defenses.

Direct Denials

The Wilber defendants deny a substantial portion of the allegations in the complaint, expressed in the following ways:

Explicit Denials:

In some instances, the Wilber defendants directly deny the allegations. For example, they explicitly deny using the plaintiffs' investment funds for personal gain.

Denials Due to Lack of Information:

In other cases, they claim insufficient information to confirm or deny the allegations. This approach is repeatedly employed in their responses to various sections of the complaint, including paragraphs 1 through 11.

Denials Based on Irrelevance:

The Wilber defendants assert that certain allegations are not applicable to them, arguing they are not required to respond to such claims. This strategy is evident in their responses to paragraphs 12 through 21.

Affirmative Defenses

In addition to denying allegations, the Wilber defendants assert 27 affirmative defenses. These legal arguments, if proven, could reduce or eliminate their liability even if the plaintiffs successfully prove their claims. Key defenses include:

Inadequacy of the Complaint:

They argue that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Waiver, Estoppel, and Unclean Hands:

The defendants contend that the plaintiffs have waived their rights, are estopped (barred) from making claims due to their prior conduct, and have acted with “unclean hands,” meaning they themselves engaged in unfair or dishonest conduct.

Plaintiffs' Own Fault:

The defendants argue that any damages suffered by the plaintiffs, if present, are partially or entirely due to the plaintiffs' own actions. This includes invoking doctrines such as contributory fault, accord and satisfaction, and election of remedies.

Statute of Limitations:

They assert that the plaintiffs' claims are barred by both the doctrine of laches and applicable statutes of limitations.

Actions of Third Parties:

The defendants claim that any damages suffered by the plaintiffs were caused by third parties outside the control or supervision of the Wilber defendants.

Good Faith Conduct:

They argue that all their actions were conducted in good faith, without malice or recklessness, and were justified and reasonable under the circumstances.

Invalid Agreements:

The defendants contend that the claims are unenforceable to the extent they are based on invalid or nonbinding agreements.

Abuse of Legal Process:

The defendants allege that the complaint was filed in bad faith.

Limited Liability:

They invoke the Utah Liability Reform Act to limit their liability to their proportional share of any damages.

Lack of Standing:

The defendants argue that the plaintiffs lack standing, meaning they do not have the legal right to bring the claims in this case.

Additional Defenses:

The Wilber defendants raise several other defenses, including:

Modification

Consent

Justification

Ratification

The economic loss rule

The principle of equitable treatment (he who seeks equity must do equity)

Breach of contract

Violation of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing

Breach of fiduciary duty

Release

The Statute of Frauds

The parol evidence rule

Lack of status as a real party in interest

Strategic Approach

These affirmative defenses reflect a strategic effort by the Wilber defendants to minimize or eliminate their liability. By leveraging a wide array of legal arguments, they aim to persuade the court that they are not responsible for the alleged damages.

This defense does not seem to offer any basis for a meaningful debate. The phrase "deny the allegations" occurs 326 times in this document! In the US legal system, a jury is to decide about the validity of the respective arguments. Estimated date of the jury trial: Q4 2025 or Q1 2026. This leaves us ample time to decide on the arguments provided in this overview. Let me know your opinions in the Comments section below!

Appendix 3: Flat Denial as a Legal Strategy

ChatGPT:

Denying all accusations in a legal case can sometimes be a strategic decision, but it is not universally "wise" and depends on the specific circumstances of the case, the evidence, and the legal goals. Here's an analysis of the factors involved:

1. Circumstances Where Denial May Be a Strategy

No Evidence Exists: If the accusations lack credible evidence, outright denial might compel the opposing side to prove their case, which can be challenging.

Preserving Legal Rights: Denying allegations at the outset can allow defendants to preserve their ability to contest the claims fully without prematurely admitting fault.

Negotiation Strategy: A blanket denial might strengthen a defendant's position in settlement negotiations by signaling unwillingness to concede liability.

2. Risks of Denying All Accusations

Credibility Damage: If evidence emerges that contradicts the denial, it can severely damage the defendant's credibility in court.

Perjury Risks: If a denial is made under oath and proven false, it could lead to perjury charges, compounding legal troubles.

Missed Opportunities for Resolution: A blanket denial might prevent meaningful discussions that could lead to an early settlement, saving time and resources.

3. Alternative Strategies

Partial Admissions: In some cases, admitting certain facts while disputing others can create a stronger and more credible position.

Focusing on Legal Defenses: Instead of outright denial, defendants can argue that the allegations, even if true, do not amount to legal liability (e.g., statute of limitations, lack of jurisdiction, etc.).

Silence or Ambiguity: In criminal cases, a defendant might choose not to testify or respond in detail, relying on the burden of proof being on the prosecution.

4. Importance of Legal Counsel

Denying all accusations should not be a knee-jerk reaction. Legal counsel will assess the strength of the case, the evidence available, and the broader implications of denial. Experienced attorneys often tailor a response based on:

The type of case (civil vs. criminal).

The forum (court, arbitration, public opinion).

The specific claims being made.

Conclusion

While denying all accusations might sometimes work as a strategic move, it carries significant risks and should be used judiciously. Consulting with skilled legal counsel is critical to determine the best approach in any legal case.

Appendix 4: Bona Fide Proposal vs. Mala Fide Scam

ChatGPT:

The distinction between a bona fide, high-risk investment proposal and a mala fide, false promising investment scam lies in intent, transparency, and adherence to ethical and legal standards. Here's a detailed comparison:

1. Intent

Bona Fide Proposal: A genuine investment opportunity presented with honest intentions, even if the risks are significant. The goal is to offer a legitimate opportunity for profit.

Mala Fide Scam: Designed with fraudulent intentions to deceive investors, misappropriate their funds, or offer no realistic potential for the promised returns.

2. Transparency

Bona Fide Proposal: Clearly outlines all associated risks, potential rewards, and relevant details. It provides thorough documentation, such as business plans, market analysis, and verifiable financial records.

Mala Fide Scam: Conceals or misrepresents risks and provides incomplete, misleading, or fabricated information. Often relies on vague promises and exaggerated claims.

3. Legal Compliance

Bona Fide Proposal: Complies with regulatory requirements, such as securities laws, licensing, and disclosure rules. It typically includes contracts, prospectuses, or offering memorandums vetted by legal professionals.

Mala Fide Scam: Operates outside the bounds of legality, often avoiding registration or regulatory scrutiny. Legal documents may be forged or absent entirely.

4. Risk vs. Reward Representation

Bona Fide Proposal: Risk levels are clearly communicated. Investors are cautioned that there is a possibility of losing some or all of their money.

Mala Fide Scam: Promises guaranteed high returns with little or no risk, which is a red flag since no investment can ensure risk-free returns.

5. Operational Credibility

Bona Fide Proposal: Run by experienced professionals with verifiable credentials. Background checks and references often confirm their track record.

Mala Fide Scam: Promoters often lack verifiable credentials and may have a history of fraudulent activity. Information about them or the business may be hard to find.

6. Evidence of Activity

Bona Fide Proposal: Demonstrates active efforts in the investment project, such as tangible assets, operations, or partnerships. Progress is often measurable.

Mala Fide Scam: Lacks substantive proof of activity. Funds may be diverted for personal use rather than being invested as promised.

7. Investor Relationship

Bona Fide Proposal: Encourages informed decision-making, providing access to all necessary information and answering investor questions. There is a relationship based on mutual respect.

Mala Fide Scam: Pressures investors to act quickly, using fear of missing out (FOMO) tactics. Little to no opportunity is provided to investigate the offer thoroughly.

8. Resolution in Case of Loss

Bona Fide Proposal: Accepts accountability for losses if the investment fails. May offer post-loss recovery measures if applicable, such as resale of assets.

Mala Fide Scam: Disappears with investor funds once exposed or challenged. Recovery of lost funds is unlikely and often requires legal action.

How to Spot a Mala Fide Investment Scam

Red Flags:

Unrealistic promises (e.g., "double your money in a week").

Lack of documentation or unverifiable claims.

High-pressure sales tactics.

Unlicensed operators.

Nonexistent or unverifiable track record.

How to Assess a Bona Fide Proposal

Due Diligence:

Verify credentials and backgrounds.

Request legal and financial documentation.

Consult independent advisors.

Check regulatory registration.

Understanding these differences ensures you can make informed decisions and protect yourself from falling victim to investment scams.

Video on Firmage's technology project

From 17' on a former invester in Firmage's anti-gravity project, real estate millionaire Brandon Fugal, tells how he got duped, and found out there was nothing in it. He lost a lot of money in the process (26:17):

Fugal says it soon became apparent that there was no truth to Firmage's claims. Within months it became apparent that Mr Firmage had some serious issues. The unfortunate truth was that there wasn't any validity to it. Fugal and Firmage had a falling out. Motion Sciences eventually ceased operations and closed down. In a statement to me Firmage says that while his invention was showing great progress its potential was not realized. He claims to have since continued to work on his device which he now calls the accelerometer and will reveal it to the world in 2023. Firmage's devices from 10 years prior now sit on the bottom shelf of a Fugal sci-fi and fantasy movie collection. "It was disappointing and heartbreaking and trust me to lose that money..."

Wilber and company could have been warned, but apparently didn't care to check Firmage's track record.

Firmage's Patent Inertial Propulsion

Through a little online search I found a patent registered by Joe Firmage called "Method and apparatus for an inertial drive".[12] It is filed under "Alleged perpetua mobilia" and dated 2010-10-12. This might very well be related to the prototypes you could see in Fugal's museum. Here's the abstract and a sample graphic:

A method of and apparatus for rectifying angular momentum of a rotating or spinning mass into linear acceleration forces includes a mass which is rotated about an axis of rotation which passes through the center of matter of the mass. This forms a gyroscope like rotating mass. The plane of rotation is perpendicular to the axis of rotation. The axis of rotation is moved in a manner to force precession of the rotating mass while holding the mass in relation to a frame of reference in a manner so that liner acceleration forces produced by the forced precession of the spinning mass are applied to the frame of reference. The spinning mass may be mounted in a frame of reference, such as a base to which the rectified angular momentum is to be applied, so that the center of matter of the rotating mass is in a fixed position with respect to a base forming a frame of reference. The forced precession of the rotating mass rectifies angular momentum of the rotating mass to create linear acceleration of the rotating mass and of the frame of reference in which the rotating mass is mounted. The invention also involves the controlling, powering, and utilizing of the axial dynamics of spinning matter for purposes of motion and energy control.

Of course, this cries out for an AI-translation into more accessible language:

The document describes a rejected U.S. patent for a method and device for propulsion without a propellant, based on manipulating the gyroscopic motion of rotating masses. The patent details a "streptation" method for generating impulses, using multiple rotating masses to minimize vibrations and achieve directional control. Various mechanical implementations are described, ranging from a single to four "spin drive columns." The patent also claims applicability at the particle level. Despite experimental results, the patent was ultimately rejected.

Briefing Document: Inertial Propulsion (US20110185840A1)

Inventor: Joseph P. Firmage

Status: Abandoned

Publication Date: August 4, 2011

Summary

This patent describes a method and apparatus for converting the angular momentum of a rotating mass into linear acceleration force. The core of the invention involves forcing the precession—or "wobbling"—of a rotating mass (gyroscope) while keeping its center of mass stationary relative to a reference frame.

Key Elements

"Streptation": The term used in this patent for forced precession.

Spin-Drive Column: A single unit consisting of a rotating mass and a "streptator" that induces forced precession.

Multiple Spin-Drive Columns: Combining multiple columns with opposing mass orientations minimizes vibrations and unwanted forces, resulting in smooth linear acceleration.

Applications: The technology has potential applications in vehicles such as cars, trains, airplanes, and spacecraft.

Key Findings

The speed of the rotating mass and the streptator impacts the generated linear force.

A prototype with two spin-drive columns demonstrated that opposing orientations of the rotating masses reduce vibrations and enhance linear movement.

The invention also outlines potential applications at the particle level, where electrons, protons, and/or neutrons could be manipulated to induce motion.

Relevant Quotes

"Streptation is the controlling, powering, and utilizing of the axial dynamics of spinning matter for purposes of motion and energy control."

"The invention can be practiced on a particle level where rotation of particles such as electrons, protons, and/or neutrons making up a body can be aligned and streptated by electrical or magnetic fields [...] to cause movement of the body."

"By mounting multiple spin drive columns on a single base, the multiple spin drive columns can be arranged with respect to one another so that the base provides a substantially smooth and controllable linear directional acceleration force."

Conclusion

While this patent provides a detailed description of a method and device for creating linear acceleration through the manipulation of gyroscopic motion, it is important to note that the patent has been abandoned. This means the invention was not further developed or commercialized. Nonetheless, the patent offers fascinating insights into the potential use of gyroscopes for propulsion.

Propulsion Without Propellant: The "Inertial Drive"

Patent US20110185840A1 describes a method and apparatus for generating linear acceleration without the use of propellant. This technology, referred to as "inertial drive" in the sources, is based on manipulating gyroscopic forces to create propulsion.

Core Method

The central approach involves forcing the precession of a rotating mass, termed "streptation" in the patent. This process involves moving the rotational axis of a spinning mass, such as a disk, in a controlled manner while keeping the center of mass stationary relative to the body being accelerated.

Operation

Rotating Mass: A mass, such as a disk, is rapidly rotated around an axis passing through its center of mass, creating a gyroscopic effect.

Streptator: The axis of the rotating mass is attached to a mechanism called the "streptator," which forces the axis into a regular, cyclical motion. This induces forced precession of the gyroscope.

Linear Acceleration: Through forced precession, part of the angular momentum of the rotating mass is converted into a linear acceleration force, which is transferred to the body being propelled.

Multiple Spin Drive Columns

To minimize vibrations and unwanted forces, the patent proposes using multiple combinations of gyroscopes and streptators, referred to as "spin drive columns." By arranging and synchronizing these columns in specific ways, the forces can be combined to produce a more controlled and efficient propulsion.

Practical Feasibility

It is important to note that the technical feasibility of this "inertial drive" has not been proven:

Experimental Stage: Sources indicate that the technology remained in an experimental phase, with no evidence of a functional device ever being constructed.

Patent Status: The patent has expired, meaning the intellectual property rights are no longer in effect.

Skepticism and Classification

The patent office expressed skepticism about the claimed functionality of the technology, classifying it among "alleged perpetual motion machines," devices that contradict the laws of physics.

Conclusion

The "inertial drive" technology, while intriguing, remains hypothetical. Further research and experimentation are necessary to determine whether it is truly possible to generate propulsion without propellant in the manner described in the patent.

FAQ: Inertial Propulsion

What is inertial propulsion?

Inertial propulsion, also known as reactionless drive, is a hypothetical type of propulsion that generates linear motion based on internal mass movements, without relying on an external reaction mass, such as propellant. The goal is to create propulsion without the need to consume fuel.

How does the inertial propulsion described in this patent work?

The proposed method uses controlled gyroscopic motion. A rotating mass, such as a disk, is mounted on an axis that passes through its center of mass. This axis is forced to precess, meaning the orientation of the rotational axis changes while the center of mass remains stationary. This forced precession, referred to as "streptation," is claimed to generate linear acceleration along the axis.

What is a "streptator"?

A "streptator" is the mechanism that induces the forced precession of the rotating mass in the inertial propulsion system. The patent describes an example involving two rotors that hold the ends of the axis on which the mass rotates. By spinning the rotors, the axis is forced to change its angle, causing the precession of the rotating mass.

What is a "spin drive column"?

A "spin drive column" is the combination of a rotating mass and a streptator. Essentially, it is a complete unit of the inertial propulsion system.

Why are multiple "spin drive columns" needed?

A single "spin drive column" can generate vibrations and forces in unintended directions. By using multiple "spin drive columns" strategically positioned, these unwanted effects can be counteracted, resulting in smoother and more controllable linear acceleration.

Can inertial propulsion also be applied at the microscopic level?

The patent suggests that the principles of inertial propulsion could potentially be applied to atomic particles, such as electrons and protons. By using electric or magnetic fields to manipulate the rotation of these particles, it might be possible to generate motion.

What is the difference between "nutation" and "streptation"?

"Nutation" refers to the natural, uncontrolled precession of a gyroscope in the absence of gravity. "Streptation," on the other hand, is the controlled, forced precession used in the inertial propulsion system.

Is inertial propulsion scientifically proven?

It is important to emphasize that inertial propulsion, as described in this patent, is a hypothetical concept. There is no scientific evidence proving that inertial propulsion actually works. Moreover, the concept violates the laws of conservation of momentum and energy, which are fundamental principles of classical mechanics.

End of that story, one would say. There is no shortage of crackpots who file patents for perpetuum mobile machines. A little background knowledge would be enough to tell you it's impossible. This is the only patent filed by Joseph P. Firmage I could find, and it is "abandoned". Yet, in December 2024, we find it still mentioned on Firmage's LinkedIn page as "Method and Apparatus for an Inertial Drive - US Not yet available - Filed Apr 1, 2009":

Is Firmage still keeping this idea alive, without a valid patent and without demonstrated success, misleading the gullible willing to donate funds to him?

Firmage's Book Manuscript "The Truth"

I found the text of Firmage's book The Truth on a Spanish website Biblioteca Pleyades, which had taken it from the now defunct EarthRenewal website.[13] I could not find any reviews, and am not even sure it was published as a book. Google Books gives this as the publisher: Granite Publishing, LLC, 1999. The text is highly unstructured, and set up around these cryptic statements:

I ran the chapters of this manuscript through NotebookLM's AI for an overview of its contents:

Evolving in Eden: A Young Civilization's Ascent

The texts comprise a collection of essays addressing a wide range of topics, from the formation of oceans and humanity's unique position in the universe to the history of warfare, slavery, and the rise of technology. They also delve into the Y2K problem, the future of consumer society, and the existence of extraterrestrial life and related technologies. The essays blend scientific facts, historical analysis, and speculative reflections on the future of humanity and its relationship with the cosmos. A recurring theme is the quest for knowledge and truth, along with the responsibility that such a pursuit entails.

Overview of the Contents of "The Truth"

The sources provide excerpts from a work titled "The Truth." These excerpts address a variety of topics, yet share a common thread: the idea that humanity is being observed and guided by extraterrestrial beings.

Extraterrestrial Influence on Humanity

The author asserts that religion and science are not opposing forces but are both rooted in historical facts. He suggests that extraterrestrial beings have played a role in significant events throughout human history, particularly in the founding of religions.

These extraterrestrial beings are referred to by the author as "teachers," and he believes they will one day openly return to Earth.

Secrecy Surrounding UFOs and Extraterrestrial Beings

A substantial portion of the text discusses alleged secrecy around UFOs and extraterrestrial life. The author examines the history of Project SIGN and Project BLUE BOOK, two U.S. Air Force initiatives that investigated UFO sightings.

He also references the alleged existence of Majestic-12, a secret organization purportedly established by President Truman in 1947 to investigate the issue of extraterrestrial beings.

The author argues that government agencies are suppressing the truth about extraterrestrial beings and that this secrecy harms humanity. He advocates for greater transparency and calls for the release of individuals bound by secrecy oaths.

The Role of Religion and the Test for Humanity

The author explores the role of religion in human history and the relationship between faith and reason. He cites Pope John Paul II's call for reconciliation between faith and reason.

He posits that humanity must pass a "test" to prove itself worthy of contact with extraterrestrial beings. This test includes:

Uniting science and spirituality

Developing an advanced understanding of the universe

Learning to live in peace and harmony

Descriptions of Extraterrestrial Technology

The text contains descriptions of alleged extraterrestrial technology, such as the "Yellow Book," a device said to function as an interactive book.

The author also cites a description of a hypothetical future technology called the "memex," resembling an advanced database that uses associative indexing.

The Importance of Truth and Love

The author emphasizes the significance of truth and love, suggesting that these concepts are fundamental to the universe.

He believes humanity is on the brink of discovering the physical nature of consciousness—a revelation that could profoundly transform our understanding of reality.

Seven Conditions for Cosmic Membership

The sources outline seven key conditions that humanity must meet to earn open contact with extraterrestrial civilizations. These conditions are based on the idea that cosmic civilizations are generally founded on principles of peaceful and harmonious coexistence.

1. Coherent Group Intelligence:

Humanity must be capable of thinking and acting as a coherent group to maintain order and community, particularly during space colonization.

2. Fearless Interaction:

We must be able to communicate with advanced beings without experiencing paralyzing fear or projecting our primitive anxieties and paranoia onto them.

3. Mastery of New Technology:

We need to understand the science and implications of revolutionary technologies such as gravity propulsion, over-unity energy sources, and the power of conscious thought.

4. Respect for Life:

Humanity must recognize the power and majesty of biological life and see natural evolution as a miraculous force for peace, not hostility.

5. Preservation of Knowledge:

Humanity must preserve historical knowledge with accuracy and durability so that the experiences and wisdom of our species are safeguarded for future generations and can be connected to a universal knowledge system.

6. Synergy Between Science and Religion:

We must develop a scientific understanding of the crucial role religion has played in human history, and vice versa, to bridge these two domains.

7. Core Values:

Humanity must grasp the profound meaning of truth, love, wisdom, knowledge, and the creative power of intention.

These seven conditions serve as a kind of "cosmic final exam" for humanity. Achieving these milestones would signify that we are ready to join a broader cosmic community founded on peace and collaboration.

Podcast 1: Firmage's Fraudulant Lab Project

Podcast 2: Wilber Defendants' Answer

NOTES

[1] "About Us", Integral Institue, integralinstitute.org, no date.

[2] "Joe Firmage, Silicon Valley UFOnaut", techgnosis.com (Originally appeared in San Francisco on June 1, 1999)

[3] Joe Firmage, The Truth, Granite Publishing, LLC, 1999. See also: Michael Learmonth, "Truth and Consequences", www.metroactive.com. From the December 10-16, 1998 issue of Metro.

[4] Pat Reavy, "Utah entrepreneur facing federal lawsuit is charged with financially exploiting 80-year-old woman", www.ksl.com, Feb. 27, 2024

[5] Erin Alberty, "A '90s teen tech whiz-turned-exec is accused of elder abuse amid Ponzi allegations", www.axios.com, Feb 29, 2024

[6] "United States District Court Initial Complaint", storage.courtlistener.com, Filed 09/05/23.

[7] See: "List of topics characterized as pseudoscience", Wikipedia.

[8] Ben Miller, "Tech Entrepreneur Sued Over $25 Million Lab Project Ponzi Scheme", news.bloomberglaw.com, Aug. 31, 2023. (Behind a paywall):

Joe Firmage, an entrepreneur who claimed to have devised a new aerospace propulsion technology concept, allegedly ran a Ponzi scheme to solicit investments by misrepresenting that the project had been awarded federal contracts, according to a Utah federal lawsuit filed by his backers.
Firmage and his three named codefendants allegedly defrauded investors of $25 million, which they claimed they sought for the stated purpose of financing the lab's operations until the government contract funds were ready to be disbursed, according to the complaint filed Wednesday in US District Court for the District of Utah.

Bloomberg Businessweek is preparing a longread about this story.

[9] See note 6. Exhibit A.

[10] Joel Achenbach, "The CEO From Cyberspace: Joe Firmage, A Master of the Universe at 28, Wants to Defy Gravity and Visit the Far Corners Of His Realm", www.washingtonpost.com, March 30, 1999. For a fairly complete description of his career highs and lows see "Joe Firmage", ipfs.io, no date.

To listen to Firmage is to hear of the Casimir effect and zero-point energy and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum foam and the Roswell incident and the MJ-12 documents. Science, pseudo-science, truth and fiction, God and electromagnetism: It's all there, a thick and pungent stew... He would like the world to think that someone has come along, someone intelligent and bold and most of all spiritual, who can make sense of it all. He would be the man who reconciled science and religion...

Clearly, the affinity between the interests of Wilber and Firmage is striking. Yet, Wilber has never gone deep into quantum mysticism, he wrote the book Quantum Questions against it. Neither Sagan nor Wilber were into UFOs. Yet, how much was Wilber convinced Firmage's anti-gravity propulsion technology was feasible?

[11] Sean N. Egan, "The Wilber Defendants' answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint", Case No. 2:23-cv -00580-JNP-JCB. (available from www.pacermonitor.com, but since this is login protected, I have stored the document on the Integral World server for easy access).

[12] "Method and apparatus for an inertial drive", patents.google.com, 2010-10-12. Current status is Abandoned. (Once a patent is abandoned, the invention loses its legal protection, and the former patent holder can no longer enforce exclusive rights against potential infringers.)

[13] , Joseph Firmage, "The Truth", International Space Sciences Organization, January 11, 1999, www.bibliotecapleyades.net. A PDF of the book can be found on the Way Back Machine Internet Archive (original URL was http://www.firmage.org/i/uploads/Truth.pdf). Hat tip to Jim Loving. I have stored it on the Integral World server as well.