More artificial scarcity. Why don't we try ridding ourselves of just one medium sized weapons system. Then we could feed everyone in the world.
Then we could stop suppressing free energy. When we do that we could harvest water out of the air, use it for fuel and drink the exhaust!
This is simply another attempt to get us to accept the privatization of water! We are the living Earth, but if we continue, we'll all be renters on our own home!
Did we suffer from a shortage of electricity before Tesla showed us how to make use of it?
The parasitic banksters who fund our science (i.e. how we are taught to frame things) have been harping about overpopulation for over 5 centuries (it started during the time of Machiavelli). If they wanted a solution, we would have had one by now. They don't want a solution to an artificial problem until they can sell us an artificial solution.
We should learn to see through this crap! They're framing everything now in terms of scarcity and we lap it up like trendy mainstream pablum!
We are suffering from a shortage of humans in the universe. Do your share by having many children who don't hoard like banksters.http://overpopulationisamyth.com/
Here a proven social engineering device 'conspiracy theory' is being
used to contrast Bayesian logic and fails miserably in discovering truth
by doing so.
The example used for 'conspiracy thinking' was the ignorance of an elected official during WW2, California Governor Earl Warren https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warren Who interestingly enough, got placed on the Supreme Court by the parasitic class later in his career!
We literally swim in a world of conspiracies (look up LIBOR scandal, for just one example: http://www.liborscandal.org/index.html),
yet we are supposed to marginalize each other with ridicule like 'nut
job' and 'conspiracy theorist' to keep us in the 'safe' and
'permissible' trendy mainstream dominant social memes.
The
criminal banksters and their corporations get to hide in plain sight and
we police each other for crossing boundaries they have set for us! They
can wreak havoc on our planet and blame humanity for their deeds. Note
however, that Bayesian Logic can't even grasp this structure and
dynamics.
This shows how a statistical and
frequency-oriented approach to looking at our world is no guarantee of
even seeing the proverbial 'elephant in the room'!
This short video's symbolism and message is paradigm changing. The video stems from a religious message and also contains a bit of idealism, but has meaning even to agnostics and atheists alike.
The Universe is suffering from a shortage of humans right now. Please do your share to rectify this situation by having many children who do not need to hoard.
The true measure of the value of a society finds expression in how it treats its weakest members: the old, infirm, and children.
'Mission Creep' 'At the Gate'
Fear-control fetish power grab to keep us (them) 'safe'.
VIDEO
This post offers a brief and partial answer to the question: "Why is it that humanity must suffer so deeply and yet those who cause that suffering can bring themselves to inflict such harm on others?"
There is what I call a disjunct in the minds of those who can make others suffer... it happens this way:
It starts with fear. If you mix that fear with high intelligence (which most of them have), the fear is amplified very drastically. Their knowledge of the world around them gives them even that much more to fear, because they are so intelligent. The 'snake' begins to eat it's own tail and causes begin to create themselves anew - with each new coil of the snake their fear manifests its own reasons to increase!
That fear leads to their need to control in order to compensate for it. They notice though that most other people are trusting. They convince themselves (wrongly) that those trusting people around them are less sophisticated than they (i.e. they become an exception to themselves with respect to the rest of humanity), otherwise those others would need to fear and need to control as much as they do.
Ergo: those who are trusting are schmucks or 'makes' that are asking to be screwed.
In order to counter this distortion they sense in their view of the world, they tell themselves they are 'special' and lie to themselves reaching hegemonic conviction with statements like: "The ends justify the means." or any other permission to continue making their world 'safe'. The truth is that the ends are determined by their means. (destructive means ALWAYS lead to destructive ends - it's a natural law)
This 'cancer' begins to cause a feedback loop in their psyche. They need to 'touch' and 'mark' all things they purvey to make themselves 'safe'.
It metastasizes into a need to even control and pervert everything and everyone around them. They can't even have sex without some sort of perversion. It's usually they who become pedophiles.
Their obsession with control mechanisms forces them to confuse chutzpah with ruthlessness and bravery with cruelty.
It is also they who 'paint' our skies with artificial clouds to witness their 'mark' in assuaging their fear and to express their thirst for more control.
Social Engineering and Propaganda Placement via Humor Moves On
Jon Stewart (Leibowitz), the comedian who made Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart,” a nightly home for sharp-edged political satire and up-to-the-moment commentary on the news, said on Tuesday that he planned to leave the program.
Mr. Stewart made the announcement on Tuesday’s episode. His departure was confirmed by the channel, which said in a statement, “Jon will remain at the helm of ‘The Daily Show’ until later this year.”http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/arts/television/jon-stewart-leaving-daily-show.html
Hiding in Plain Sight - The Empress is Naked Destructive Memes For the Undiscerning Mind
Let's
blame all of humanity for the sins of a parasitic 'elite' who knows
nothing better than to destroy in order to create. If things were as they should
be, we would be living in the clouds and traveling to the stars right
now.
This is how unrestrained bankster-led corporatism hides in
plain sight. If they can paint us a picture in which WE are the problem,
then the failure of those we trusted to guide and steward our world
don't stand out anymore.
Will they be be proud of their eugenics
and their attempt to divide humanity against itself? What account will
they tend of their stewardship of Earth? Will our galactic neighbors
trust a species who is a danger to itself? Those who do this to humanity
in order to rule the world destroy themselves as well.
In this introductory
video I would like to explain what knowledge representation is, how
to build and apply them. There are basically three phases involved in
the process of building a knowledge representation. Acquisition of
data (which includes staging), collation and the representation
itself.
The collation and
the representation phases of the process are mentioned here, but I
will explain them further in future videos.
You are now watching
a simulation of the acquisition phase as it collects and stores
preliminary structure from the data it encounters in terms of the
vocabulary contained within that data. Acquisition is a necessary
prerequisite for the collation phase following it, because the
information it creates from the data are used by the collation
algorithms which then transform that information into knowledge. The
statistics you are seeing tabulated are only a small subset of those
collected in a typical acquisition phase. Each of these counters are
being updated in correspondence to the recognition coming from
underlying parsers running in the background. Depending upon the
computer resources involved in the acquisition, these parsers may
even even run concurrently as is shown in this simulation.
The objects you see
moving around in the video are of two different kinds: knowledge
fields or knowledge molecules. Those nearest to
you are the field representations of the actual data being collected
called knowledge fields. They could represent an individual
symbol, punctuation, morpheme, lexeme, word, emotion, perspective, or
some other unit of information in the data. Each of them contain
their own signature – even if their value, state or other intrinsic
properties are unknown or indeterminate during the acquisition.
Those farther away
from the view are clusters of fields which have already coalesced
into groups according to shared dynamically adaptive factors such as
similarity, relation, cardinality, ordinality,...
These 'molecules'
also contain their own set of signatures and may be composed of a
mixture of fields, meta-fields and hyper-fields that are unique to
all others. The collation phase has the job of assigning these
molecules to their preliminary holarchical domains
which are then made visible in the resulting knowledge
representation. Uniqueness is preserved even if they contain common
elements with others in the domain they occupy. Clusters of
knowledge molecules and/or fields grouped together are known as
'knowledge domains', 'structural domains', 'dynamical domains' or
'resonance domains', depending upon which of their aspects is being
emphasized
https://independent.academia.edu/CareyGButler for the more information.
My attention has been recently brought again to the book: Thinking, Fast and Slow. There
is so much ‘work’ out there to comment on that it would take many
lifetimes to cover it all, but this one hits me right in the gut: it’s about heuristics. This
post will delve into the misconceptions in the book regarding a
heuristic and heuristics in general with respect to mind, thought and,
most importantly, knowledge and its representation.
Of course there are many insightful aspects to the book and I hope
this post induces people to buy and read the book! It is definitely
worth that effort! There is much truth in the book and useful considerations regarding the psychology of thought (at least for me).
There is a universal constant in our universe that I call the ‘Near and Far Contraposition’. This constant is responsible for the effect we experience when we look at things close up verses far away. It ‘makes it’s appearance’ when we say things like; “He can’t see the forest for the trees.” I will describe this constant more below as time permits me to do so.
His System 1 (Intuition) is, in
reality, taking relational bearing on entities involving deeper scope
(among other factors) than in his System 2.
Whereas his System 2 is taking that relational bearing with
entities involving more shallow scope (among other factors) to entities
than in his System 1.
His systems will be shown to be completely
unnecessary. There are ‘systems’ within consciousness, but they are not
where Daniel says they are.
I’m amazed that someone of his depth is unable (or unwilling) to recognize this!
Your thoughts are welcome too. We all are impacted by this artificial
environment created for us that causes stress and economy in our lives.
It is possible to an extent to ‘divorce’ ourselves from these frenetic
states, but when our customers do not ‘cooperate’ (due to different
priorities, perspectives and needs) with our efforts, then it does
present challenges for us.
It used to be called tolerance and empathy. Social engineering that shifts the responsibility of an individual to a group. Very crafty stuff. The people in the audience lap it up like its a Popsicle.
Too much morality? I'm listening to this right now. I'll post my thoughts on it here when I get the chance.
I
have already begun to write responses on YouTube. I'm working on my
project now so I will get back later. I have to stop for a time to get
my work done. There is so much wrong with this 'philosophy' that needs
to get out there. Here are the posts thus far:
@36:05
you state that terror groups may be started with a half-dozen sitting
in a barber shop or pub in the attempt to sell us on the idea that
terrorism can arise out of our own midst. Most of the terror groups that
ever did so were larger groups and most of them (probably almost all)
were infiltrated by our own governmental agencies who then radicalised
and financed their terrorism. This was made clear to be the case with
the Klu Klux Klan in the 1950s and 60s.
@36:10 “And
there can be nasty surprises…” You don’t take into account the fact
that almost all narcissistic despots have been put in by ‘global
players’ (and banksters and higher up the ‘food chain’). And for
“spreading revolution” why not turn your attention how the US, NATO and
Saudi Arabia have joined forces in coordinating Al Qaeda (AL-C-I-A-dah)
in Syria?
@36:23 “So
there are nasty shocks. There are [sic.] a baseline level of violence
that, except for a totalitarian state, you’re never going to stamp out
to zero…” A totalitarian state is where the violence a society endures
reaches its climax. At that ‘place’ humanity begins to ‘shed its skin’
and replace the tyranny with liberty and freedom.
@37:00 “…I
think history is going to push in that direction. And it’s not because I
think that there’s some forced ‘mysterious’ [facial language nuances
attempting to evoke the idea of ridicule of the topic being brought to
awareness] dialectical arc of justice that’s gonna’ bring us to Utopia.” Hegelian dialectic is one of a few dialectical forms that takes on the
illusion of being correct. Hegel didn’t honestly consider that there are
other kinds of dialectic forms that can occur.
As a professor of cognitive science and
psychology you should be aware of a multitude of dialectic forms that
build a spectrum of impetus for evolutionary change (I prefer the terms enfolding/unfolding).
Every time humanity inserts itself as the centre of the
universe of discourse, it makes itself sick. Morality becomes negotiable
and expedience takes the upper hand. We must save ourselves by not
giving into the temptation of believing we must control our mutual
reality in all of its forms.
This ‘insertion” of humanity is an expression of our
tendency towards Anthropomorphism. It is often so subtle that we don’t
recognise it in its many forms. We haven’t yet recognised the
omni-morphistic structure of our Cosmos (of which we and our universe is a
part.) [Please remember this in reading my other comments here!]
@37:38 “We
can eke out longer and longer life spans…” This is not necessarily a
measure of progress. Far more important is the quality of that life
span. The elitist mindset has a great deal of inherent hubris as it
carries out the ‘stewardship’ of humanity. If it were REALLY concerned
with the development of better life spans, then it would stop the
overwhelming fraud in finance markets and use those ‘resources’ to feed
and educate those of need. Look at our cities. Life is being sucked out.
There are so many axes of human development that mankind
hasn’t even begun to catalog nor is even aware exists. Some of the most
gifted people have to “eke out” (borrowing your wording) an existence
on the street and the best our science can do for them is to give them
drugs so that they’re quiet and docile. The intellectual ‘body’ of
humanity is RESPONSIBLE for the welfare and potential of those who are
less fortunate, but instead it occupies itself with overpopulation myths
& means of control.
One last comment in this ‘instalment': When I refer to
Anthropomorphism I include all of its ‘inflections’. If I need to
clarify this, let me know (if you even bother to read this).
I’m back to posting on this video in case someone’s
interested. Look at the comment section to follow me. Please be patient
as I have little time to spare for it, but it is very important to
provide an alternative perspective on what Steven Pinker is saying.
@42:00 you call for ethics centred upon a spectrum of "who get's hurt/who flourishes" (utilitarianism) and @42:34
you state that thinking like an economist makes people better off! With
the world in the shape it's in? Open bankster fraud &
fear-control-fetish abounds. Utilitarianism offers no guarantee of
individual rights!
It's
moral reductionism where the majority decides even over fundamental
basic rights of freedom and liberty of individuals. Also utilitarianism
is unable to facilitate/account for all of what being human is.
Subscribing to a morality based upon utility is inherently a danger to
humanity. Means and Ends become disharmonious and lacking integrity.
I'm
analysing the video in my spare time and have discovered that pinker is
a brilliant coordinator or nexus for premature globalism. If I am
wrong, please help me out because that's how the analysis is going.
It is a classic justification for the use of methods not congruent with the goal or intention set forth.
A truth:
The ends are determined by their means.
If you use means not congruent with a goal or intention, then the goal or intention changes accordingly.
This is an example of a type of meme I call a ‘constant’. Constants fulfill at least one condition: they are valid everywhere in our Cosmos (or Kosmos, if you prefer).
