Could evade the eye laser with better nutrition and detoxification. There are other cymaticly cromulent technologies and techniques too, unused.
Don’t get me started on mRNA. Maybe just try listening to the warnings of those who came up with it? Or the results? (We used to take products off the market that were even 100,000 times less harmful… Not to mention the various related plans afoot, not least of relevance with that, “operation lockstep”. … (Would have thought the eugenics ties of those loudest promoting it would have been sufficient reason to pause and reconsider [(or any one of dozens of other clues and red flags)], but then I underestimated how successfully the fear induced by the (as one middling insider was caught on camera years before saying) “once the terrorist thing wears off we’re going to have people running scared of a disease without symptoms” plan would in interfere with our access to our considerate, critical, creative forebrains), and how successfully another mass formation [!!!} could be induced just as there was an accelerating (to tipping point) awakening to the prior one.
Dentistry, too, is merely the same as the others, in how it’s held back for profit. How many times has there been an innovation in dentistry, denied in practice, in favour of painful and poisonous treatments that do not even restore tooth health. For example, if I recall correctly, there have already been over 3 different methods developed for regrowing teeth (at least one, since decades ago, cheap, safe, and it works ~ and would have all but obsoleted dentistry). Instead, the mercury industry keeps dentists crazy in the head, putting mercury in the mouths of their “patients”, making them crazy in the head too, not to mention the devastation that does to the immune system…
For-profit healthcare (<- an oxymoron btw), protects itself with the maxim “A patient cured is a customer lost.” (<- A sentiment more commonly chirped in prudent awareness and cautioning in decades past. … I wonder what caused this utterance to have fallen out of such prominence. Edward Bernays springs to mind…)
The industry. It’s a big club. You and I are not in the big club. They know what’s good for them.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair.
If you believe “we’re living in the future”, you have no idea how far we’ve been held back, “for profit”. “For profit”, too, a marketing mislead. It’s “wealth extraction maximisation”. Driving everyone but the best kleptarch towards total absolute destitution and beyond. Y’know we could have had [interstellar[!]] spaceships each since the 1930s, right? Follow the tech arc from Michael Faraday through to Nikola Tesla (and all the more quiet, less showy, between, and since). Even Nikola Tesla’s innovations extended as far as health [~ indeed, throughout. Even his plan to power the world for free, was at frequencies etc that would be conducive to health. Cymatic cromulence. Mmmmm.]. Have you read the reports, the testimonies, or even experienced for yourself, the health benefits of, e.g., a Tesla Coil? Or any of many other energy based healing technologies? And yet, we’re going to cite laser surgery, and mRNA as signs we’re in the future? We’re not even in the present, a century ago! In proclaiming these as signs we’re in the future, we’re no better than those who, in their respective times, insisted “more leaches!”, or “test it on the little people”.
Dig in to this topic. It may on one hand be daunting, how much can be taken from us, how much we can be held back, how much we can be deceived and made wholly obliviously ignorant [(~ “agnotology” is an eye opening field of research, even just to become aware it exists, let alone the vastness of its scope and scale of effect on the world, in abusive deployment, so long)]. But on the other hand, rejoice, at how much more headroom we truly have. :)
Things like (just off the top of my head) Lutein, Zeaxanthin, Carotines, Retinol, Creatine, and countless more are reported to have helped restore eyesight, along with many techniques, and conversely, in some cases, sudden blindness has been suspected caused by nutrient uptake blockers (including GLP1s), starvation, stress, and extreme diets. So, yes, diet very much can have a huge impact on improving or worsening sight. … I’m struggling to comprehend where the incredulity in this could come from.
Fascinating world out there to explore, at our fingertips, still, despite efforts to censor and control narratives to protect wealth extraction maximisation, as the rules demand of the corporation, to “protect the shareholders”.
Fun tip, add “ayurveda” to health/biology websearches. For just one way to get out of the corporate curated bubble, to a perspective that lets you out of “cannot see the forest for the trees”.
I’m not opposed to laser eye surgery. It’s just another example of an oz of prevention worth a lb of cure, and too often too soon reaching for the “cure” of a surgeon’s knife (so to speak), when there are gentler, perhaps less acutely profitable, “alternative” ways, that have no monied incentive to promote.
The downvotes and replies to this have me wonder if the agnotological assault we’re all under, is winning. The level of epistemology expressed… Where are we on Graham’s Hierarchy of Debate with that? Mostly Adhominem? The irony, given the content already expressing in passing the awareness of “how much we can be deceived and made wholly obliviously ignorant”, to have had such responses expressing such oblivion, doing the very thing. I didn’t want to be that right. Maybe my fault, and I should have been more positive in what I manifested, right? Heh.
… And to think… I used to work in the agnotology industry. In “advertising or marketing” (before renouncing it when Bill Hick’s saved me). I used to be one who would easily dupe people (“just doing my job”). It’s oft corroborated true what they say: It’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they’ve been fooled.
… especially with the UptonSinclairian duress… (“It’s easier to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it.”), that we’re all under, to some extents, in this perversely incentivised economy.
[Edit: Oh wait… Re-reading what that’s responding to, that seems non-sequitur of some sort, since I was already lamenting the absence of curiosity and genuine (not mere rhetorically dismissive) questions.]
You never stopped to ask if those who tell you these conspiracy theories about Tesla & Co. have their own agenda. For example selling books or some useless “apparatus”. And no, citing some fallacies or abusing the thesaurus doesn’t make the things you say sound any smarter.
Thankyou for your response. However you’re responding to a comment encouraging curiosity and questions, without any curiosity and questions, about which, I have much curiosity and many questions.
You never stopped to ask if those who tell you these conspiracy theories about Tesla & Co. have their own agenda.
What led you to this determination that I had never done that?
Is that to imply that having their own agenda means their accusations are false or something?
Maybe you missed it earlier, but the term “conspiracy theories” has already been ousted as having the effect of dissuading scrutiny [e.g. of the guilty]. Is this your intention? Or is this satire? Or is this simply the first time you’ve encountered the idea and had not yet entertained the possibility?
What “conspiracy theories” about “Tesla & Co”? Is that referring to the Tesla company owned by Musk? Or about Nikola Tesla?
Your opening assertion that could have been a question, is a mite muddied and confounding. Did it seem straight forward to you when you asked it? Upon re-read, have you noticed these issues I’ve raised? And that seems fair?
For example selling books or some useless “apparatus”.
Is this mere speculative conjecture? [Presumably] Not knowing who “tell you these conspiracy theories”, you therefor also know not what else they’re doing.
I know this is just an example, but, does it have to be so heavily weighted, leaning to confirm your conjecture, in how they’re “useless”? Aware and intended that was a poison seed? (~ A fallacy I succumb to making often too.).
Again, wondering if you think this is of relevance… like a refutation hinges on this side criteria. This is intended merely as a invite to consider the circumstantial, right? And not as if this refutes the possibilities beyond all valid and sound consideration?
Would be nice if we could get access to the suppressed technologies. Or even if those who write books on such topics could even make their print fees back. Most who speak on this topic are not selling anything. books, useless apparatus, nor let alone the emancipatory technologies themselves. Those most likely to first encounter, I imagine would be the loudest, and thus also, the most likely to be managed opposition shills. The quiet empathic sort, tend not want the limelight, merely want the benefit to the world, and that’s an easy loud contrast to look out for… who are the fevered narcissistic egos who want the attention, who loudly peddle the bombast and future-fake their way to get all the hopium hopped up in your minds. In a sea of misinformation, everybody’s a shill, for sure. But that does not mean one can then evade that problematic situation by proclaiming to have found the one true truth. Experience teaches that’s much much more likely a sign you’ve been duped, rather than have genuinely found the one true truth. Like the old saying goes “listen to those who seek the truth, run from those who claim to have found it.”. Well, I’m not going to do just quite that. That’d leave those who claim to have found the truth, both in their curated echo chamber, and, risk spreading that arrogant presumption and epistemological fail to others. Like the scene in Akira: “It must be a trap.” “Then why are you still going!?” “I want to find out what kind of a trap it is”. All that to go the long way around to asking… Would you not want to scrutinise books on that topic, and test apparatus, rather than just dismiss it off hand in presumption to know they’re bunk because presumably they’re up to no good, just in it for the money or fame or whatever thing besides honest interest? [~ and not use that presumptive dismissiveness to extend to a non-sequitur adhominem character assassination and transitively dismissing whole fields of research?]
And no, citing some fallacies or abusing the thesaurus doesn’t make the things you say sound any smarter.
That’s fun. It’s also irrelevant. IDGAF how it makes the things I say sound. I renounced that manipulative crap 24 years ago, when I renounced my career in advertising. Much more interested in the epistemology these days, and the search for truth, and pegagogy. So, fun as that gaslighting is, in attempting to dissuade having fallacies pointed out, I’ll carry on pointing out fallacies. If it stings, that’s your ego, been deceiving you, keeping you from truth, preferring it’s own delusional comfort. If ignorance is bliss, give me agony.
Fallacies… some noted, even in that brief 3 sentences… Ad hominem, genetic fallacy, appeal to motive, strawman, dismissal, poisoning the well, appeal to cynicism, false dilemma, and likely more yet. Any fallacies you can spot I’ve made? Very eager to have what’s in my shadow shown to me. Would not want to be ignorantly going around as one of those messers mucking up society, deluded, thinking my thinking’s sound when it’s not even valid.
Was this even a concern? Like, was it implied anywhere that citing fallacies or “abusing the thesaurus” were making the things I say sound any smarter? Just wondering: why even bother with that ad-hominem arguing tone with apparent implied accusation?
When I was 14, after learning my verbal iq’s only 90 (~ annoying small apperture for my 180 visual iq, trying say the pictures that say a thousand words), I made the foolish error of thinking that if I expanded my vocabulary, I’d be able to communicate my ideas better. Alas, much like how the Socratic method fails in the face of the stubbornly ignorant who refuse to even entertain and answer questions, this notion of an extended vocabulary helping communication fails in the face of those who not only do not share your vocabulary, but have no interest in expanding theirs with curiosity. Not that you were owed an explanation there, but, I thought that might help expand conception of the possibilities beyond the reactive judgemental. We’ve each highs and lows in our aptitude profile. Many aptitudes can be tested. Not just the three that comprise iq. Also emotional inteligence, wisdom, spiritual aptitude, interpersonal aptitude, intrapersonal aptitude, philosophical aptitude, and on and on it extends for dozens.
And further, beyond that, in general… Are you now (or even, were you, at the time) aware of the fallacies here?
And how it wasn’t really on topic, dealing with the substance, and instead was derailing from the substance, on to talk about me?
Insidiously, these ad-hominem reflexes sneak up on us, pulling us down Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement. As does mere arguing tone. Or even mere contradiction, without substantive reasoning. Just escalates the combative fear that impedes access to our more considerate, critical, creative forebrains, keeping us in “fight or flight”. That dumb may work for running away from a sabre tooth tiger, but it does not help us navigate nuanced social intricacies and technological complexities. Alas, I’ve yet to find reliable ways in text that helps encourage and invite people to that considerate exploratory headspace, out of the induced certainties that keep us stuck making a mess obliviously, not learning. “What an opportunity to learn, once I learned to learn” – The Man From Earth. What more am I still behind that cruel horizon, where the key that opens the box, is locked in the box? What more ways out there to help people sublimate out of the induced ignorance prison? The exploration continues on, at least for those who’ve begun.
And of course, merely pointing out a fallacy, or accusing of some personal trait, is no refutation, no confirmation either has the truth. We’re all blind men with another piece of the elephant. Naysaying’s cheap, but sharing your interpretation of the whole from your part, while almost certainly wrong, does help us get closer to the truth.
The point remains… I welcome the questions. Heh.
It’s a very different feel… when starting to question again… after long time induced to arrogance and not realising it had atrophied curiosity and the questioning muscles. Shifting back from the closed “I get it”, to the open “what more is there to get?”. And the more new stuff learned, the easier it is to accidentally climb back up on Dunning-Kruger’s certainty peak. Vigilance, the price we must eternally pay. Keep learning more yet, and it’s almost inevitable to fall into impostor syndrome, as becoming aware how much more there is to learn, and starting to doubt your abilities, especially as others bring their piece of the picture, a piece you didn’t have. Why didn’t you have? Must be because you’re of inferior capability. So goes the subconscious sabotage. At least, in those who’re not so arrogant and ignorant that they can even entertain the new information. This gets much easier to do once no longer in naive realism (the cognitive condition of believing your beliefs; of believing your perceptions are true reality itself).
“Leave no stone un-turned in the search for truth.” … did I miss any?
[PS, sorry this got long, but that’s very often how brandolini’s law [multiplied by cunningham’s law] goes, especially with a visual thinker; especially with an autistic intp on their “special interest”].
Right now, you’re doing the gish gallop, intellectual signaling and apparently also something i would call “fallacy gallop”. You keep trying to distract from the fact that you have zero reputable evidence for any of this mystical secret knowledge “theyTM” allegedly suppress, by posting unrelated links and accusing others to be blind in a surprisingly eloquent way. That name dropping you do is also highly annoying, and completely unrelated to your claims about suppressed tech or knowledge.
Like, take that magic tesla healing thing. Why don’t you post some evidence for that? Is it because that “evidence” happens to be some modern blogspot equivalent blog? Or some book from a known quack?
Side note: Your post would probably be a lot shorter without all that fake-intellectual glitter.
Thankyou for triggering this rant from me. :)
Could evade the eye laser with better nutrition and detoxification. There are other cymaticly cromulent technologies and techniques too, unused.
Don’t get me started on mRNA. Maybe just try listening to the warnings of those who came up with it? Or the results? (We used to take products off the market that were even 100,000 times less harmful… Not to mention the various related plans afoot, not least of relevance with that, “operation lockstep”. … (Would have thought the eugenics ties of those loudest promoting it would have been sufficient reason to pause and reconsider [(or any one of dozens of other clues and red flags)], but then I underestimated how successfully the fear induced by the (as one middling insider was caught on camera years before saying) “once the terrorist thing wears off we’re going to have people running scared of a disease without symptoms” plan would in interfere with our access to our considerate, critical, creative forebrains), and how successfully another mass formation [!!!} could be induced just as there was an accelerating (to tipping point) awakening to the prior one.
Dentistry, too, is merely the same as the others, in how it’s held back for profit. How many times has there been an innovation in dentistry, denied in practice, in favour of painful and poisonous treatments that do not even restore tooth health. For example, if I recall correctly, there have already been over 3 different methods developed for regrowing teeth (at least one, since decades ago, cheap, safe, and it works ~ and would have all but obsoleted dentistry). Instead, the mercury industry keeps dentists crazy in the head, putting mercury in the mouths of their “patients”, making them crazy in the head too, not to mention the devastation that does to the immune system…
For-profit healthcare (<- an oxymoron btw), protects itself with the maxim “A patient cured is a customer lost.” (<- A sentiment more commonly chirped in prudent awareness and cautioning in decades past. … I wonder what caused this utterance to have fallen out of such prominence. Edward Bernays springs to mind…)
The industry. It’s a big club. You and I are not in the big club. They know what’s good for them.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair.
If you believe “we’re living in the future”, you have no idea how far we’ve been held back, “for profit”. “For profit”, too, a marketing mislead. It’s “wealth extraction maximisation”. Driving everyone but the best kleptarch towards total absolute destitution and beyond. Y’know we could have had [interstellar[!]] spaceships each since the 1930s, right? Follow the tech arc from Michael Faraday through to Nikola Tesla (and all the more quiet, less showy, between, and since). Even Nikola Tesla’s innovations extended as far as health [~ indeed, throughout. Even his plan to power the world for free, was at frequencies etc that would be conducive to health. Cymatic cromulence. Mmmmm.]. Have you read the reports, the testimonies, or even experienced for yourself, the health benefits of, e.g., a Tesla Coil? Or any of many other energy based healing technologies? And yet, we’re going to cite laser surgery, and mRNA as signs we’re in the future? We’re not even in the present, a century ago! In proclaiming these as signs we’re in the future, we’re no better than those who, in their respective times, insisted “more leaches!”, or “test it on the little people”.
Dig in to this topic. It may on one hand be daunting, how much can be taken from us, how much we can be held back, how much we can be deceived and made wholly obliviously ignorant [(~ “agnotology” is an eye opening field of research, even just to become aware it exists, let alone the vastness of its scope and scale of effect on the world, in abusive deployment, so long)]. But on the other hand, rejoice, at how much more headroom we truly have. :)
Let me just better diet my vision back to normal lmao
Is this meme? Am I missing the joke?
Is this just incredulous scoffing?
Any genuine curiosity?
Things like (just off the top of my head) Lutein, Zeaxanthin, Carotines, Retinol, Creatine, and countless more are reported to have helped restore eyesight, along with many techniques, and conversely, in some cases, sudden blindness has been suspected caused by nutrient uptake blockers (including GLP1s), starvation, stress, and extreme diets. So, yes, diet very much can have a huge impact on improving or worsening sight. … I’m struggling to comprehend where the incredulity in this could come from.
Fascinating world out there to explore, at our fingertips, still, despite efforts to censor and control narratives to protect wealth extraction maximisation, as the rules demand of the corporation, to “protect the shareholders”.
Fun tip, add “ayurveda” to health/biology websearches. For just one way to get out of the corporate curated bubble, to a perspective that lets you out of “cannot see the forest for the trees”.
I’m not opposed to laser eye surgery. It’s just another example of an oz of prevention worth a lb of cure, and too often too soon reaching for the “cure” of a surgeon’s knife (so to speak), when there are gentler, perhaps less acutely profitable, “alternative” ways, that have no monied incentive to promote.
What the fuck lmao
It reads like one of those skitzo manifestoes
Always fun when they find the thesaurus.
TL;DR
Tldr is that I think we found RFKjr’s lemmy account.
Holy tinfoil
cromulent is a perfectly cromulent word
The downvotes and replies to this have me wonder if the agnotological assault we’re all under, is winning. The level of epistemology expressed… Where are we on Graham’s Hierarchy of Debate with that? Mostly Adhominem? The irony, given the content already expressing in passing the awareness of “how much we can be deceived and made wholly obliviously ignorant”, to have had such responses expressing such oblivion, doing the very thing. I didn’t want to be that right. Maybe my fault, and I should have been more positive in what I manifested, right? Heh.
… And to think… I used to work in the agnotology industry. In “advertising or marketing” (before renouncing it when Bill Hick’s saved me). I used to be one who would easily dupe people (“just doing my job”). It’s oft corroborated true what they say: It’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they’ve been fooled.
… especially with the UptonSinclairian duress… (“It’s easier to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it.”), that we’re all under, to some extents, in this perversely incentivised economy.
Questions…? Go for it…
Lub me some curiosity and the Socratic method.
[Edit: Oh wait… Re-reading what that’s responding to, that seems non-sequitur of some sort, since I was already lamenting the absence of curiosity and genuine (not mere rhetorically dismissive) questions.]
You never stopped to ask if those who tell you these conspiracy theories about Tesla & Co. have their own agenda. For example selling books or some useless “apparatus”. And no, citing some fallacies or abusing the thesaurus doesn’t make the things you say sound any smarter.
Thankyou for your response. However you’re responding to a comment encouraging curiosity and questions, without any curiosity and questions, about which, I have much curiosity and many questions.
And further, beyond that, in general… Are you now (or even, were you, at the time) aware of the fallacies here?
And how it wasn’t really on topic, dealing with the substance, and instead was derailing from the substance, on to talk about me?
Insidiously, these ad-hominem reflexes sneak up on us, pulling us down Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement. As does mere arguing tone. Or even mere contradiction, without substantive reasoning. Just escalates the combative fear that impedes access to our more considerate, critical, creative forebrains, keeping us in “fight or flight”. That dumb may work for running away from a sabre tooth tiger, but it does not help us navigate nuanced social intricacies and technological complexities. Alas, I’ve yet to find reliable ways in text that helps encourage and invite people to that considerate exploratory headspace, out of the induced certainties that keep us stuck making a mess obliviously, not learning. “What an opportunity to learn, once I learned to learn” – The Man From Earth. What more am I still behind that cruel horizon, where the key that opens the box, is locked in the box? What more ways out there to help people sublimate out of the induced ignorance prison? The exploration continues on, at least for those who’ve begun.
And of course, merely pointing out a fallacy, or accusing of some personal trait, is no refutation, no confirmation either has the truth. We’re all blind men with another piece of the elephant. Naysaying’s cheap, but sharing your interpretation of the whole from your part, while almost certainly wrong, does help us get closer to the truth.
The point remains… I welcome the questions. Heh.
It’s a very different feel… when starting to question again… after long time induced to arrogance and not realising it had atrophied curiosity and the questioning muscles. Shifting back from the closed “I get it”, to the open “what more is there to get?”. And the more new stuff learned, the easier it is to accidentally climb back up on Dunning-Kruger’s certainty peak. Vigilance, the price we must eternally pay. Keep learning more yet, and it’s almost inevitable to fall into impostor syndrome, as becoming aware how much more there is to learn, and starting to doubt your abilities, especially as others bring their piece of the picture, a piece you didn’t have. Why didn’t you have? Must be because you’re of inferior capability. So goes the subconscious sabotage. At least, in those who’re not so arrogant and ignorant that they can even entertain the new information. This gets much easier to do once no longer in naive realism (the cognitive condition of believing your beliefs; of believing your perceptions are true reality itself).
“Leave no stone un-turned in the search for truth.” … did I miss any?
[PS, sorry this got long, but that’s very often how brandolini’s law [multiplied by cunningham’s law] goes, especially with a visual thinker; especially with an autistic intp on their “special interest”].
Right now, you’re doing the gish gallop, intellectual signaling and apparently also something i would call “fallacy gallop”. You keep trying to distract from the fact that you have zero reputable evidence for any of this mystical secret knowledge “theyTM” allegedly suppress, by posting unrelated links and accusing others to be blind in a surprisingly eloquent way. That name dropping you do is also highly annoying, and completely unrelated to your claims about suppressed tech or knowledge.
Like, take that magic tesla healing thing. Why don’t you post some evidence for that? Is it because that “evidence” happens to be some modern blogspot equivalent blog? Or some book from a known quack?
Side note: Your post would probably be a lot shorter without all that fake-intellectual glitter.