Yes, and people's tendency not to easily change their minds is one of the major reasons the truth gets out so little. Those in power understand our tendency to anchor in our beliefs and exploit that tendency to their great advantage.
Being able to think critically is a rapidly disappearing skill. There is nothing wrong with being able to see your original thoughts were incorrect based on information received.
Being a total prick because your ego gets in the way is where many go wrong.
This is what I do whenever I feel there is cause for skepticism:
1. Check for Revelation of the Method (RoM) signs. I knew instantly that covid was a psyop when they told us nonsense about a Chinese research team finding two species of snake to be "reservoirs" of the virus, a claim rubbished within the same article by a biosecurity specialist at Sydney University as "complete garbage", pushing out nonsense and then rubbishing it being a typical psyop feature.
2. If there are RoM signs, check to see if there's anything that provides clear evidence of the story being true regardless of the RoM. I've never seen RoM signs in a story that showed signs of being true regardless.
When it comes to other information outside psyops I guess "skin in the game" / "cui bono" is a good criterion to judge by, however, as much as possible I like to rely on the actual evidence. It kind of drives me nuts when people question my claims of a psyop when they cannot discern a motive. If the evidence says something, regardless of whether I can discern a motive or not it is the evidence that guides my thought.
Ignore the MSM as it is good for nothing that you need to live well. I look outside to see if global warming is in effect or go outside to experience it. It snowed here yesterday and this morning it is 19 degrees. For this area, it is nothing close to global warming. Case closed on that issue.
Whatever else going on is mostly stupid or silly especially if it is in the news. It's all about marketing, money, power and control. I have my truth and they have theirs. You will not survive listening to their truth as it is 99% lies and propaganda. Case closed.
I feel your ban! I have been a part time writer on Quora for about 6 years but i have a rather sharp and slicing tendency to "call em as i 'see' em". Always have. I quit trying to 'make small talk'when i was 16. I recently turned 73. Quora Moderators and Bots shadowban much of my work. My thrust is to help others to 'see' their way thru the mucky-muck. I have read Substack now shadowbans and/ or removes some written work.LMFAO. I wish you good fortune.
Well elucidated! I stand by these principles too, and especially since 2020 when I realized I knew even less than I thought I did. As I sing in this video: “it’s not either/or; it’s both and more.” (I mean, not always the latter half of the phrase, but you get what I mean…): https://open.substack.com/pub/sanefrancisco/p/the-navy-blue-venn-diagram
Deuteronomy 18:22 is helpful here: "When a prophet speaks... if the thing does not come about or come true... the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."
Is the Telegraph pushed into the Establishment "Left-wing" sector because the Establishment "Right-wing" sector is so crowded? I thought it was a really helpful guide till I spotted that.
Thank you for that information on climate change, including the movement of the treeline. Although a decade ago, the recognition that 9/11 wasn't the work of 19 terrorists started my "wake up" journey I maintained strong conviction of scary AGW until I recognised how completely fraudulent science in general was with covid.
The climate-focused site, Skeptical Science, was my bible. It seemed so reasonable - they lay down all the naysayer arguments and seem to put perfectly reasonable arguments against them as well as allow argument in the comments, supposedly only moderating on the basis of civility and outright nonsense. However, SS sometimes strays into other areas and when they strayed into covid and censored my arguments - in a totally ridiculous manner I might add, labelling my 10 points a Gish Gallop when I only put 10 points to try to make a convincing case - I pondered whether they censored perfectly good disagreement arguments on climate too.
What kept me hooked was the seemingly simple science of it: CO2 exists in a trace amount and has a warming effect even at that trace level and we're pumping gigatonnes into the atmosphere every year so - with an increasing temperature - it makes perfect sense. Moreover, it wasn't as if the authorities spoke with one voice on it as they do with the scamdemic for example. In Australia where we make a lot of money from our coal,a number of politicians spoke against it and it seemed to me that any scientists speaking against it were funded by the fossil fuel companies. I've since learnt, however, that although some of them probably are funded by the fossil fuel companies others are not and now as CC is much more mainstream we can see how scientists supporting CC are supported by the government.
I'm still suffering cognitive dissonance though, however, there is no way that I can ever feel any fear about anything the authorities try to make me feel afraid of again. I couldn't do it. What makes me afraid is the cravenness of "the people", not those in power.
Have you ever stood inside a greenhouse? I stood inside one with over 1000 parts per million of CO2, when outside is around 400. I should have boiled and died, if I were to believe mainstream global warming propaganda.
There isn’t any evidence that CO2 has a warming effect, is the point.
CO2 is critical for all life on Earth. Lower CO2 means less life. That’s why they want to lower CO2; they want fewer humans.
I don't wish to doubt, however, I thought plants took in CO2 and pushed out oxygen so I'm wondering why there would be over 1000 PPM of CO2 in a greenhouse?
When I believed in AGW I thought the doubters also accepted CO2 as being a greenhouse gas but didn't accept that it was particularly problematic.
Thank you for your very informative reply - none of it was remotely teaching me how to suck eggs, I guess I'm horribly ignorant. I shall look up Eschenbach.
Being able to change your mind is such a wonderful gift. Who needs rigid thinking?
Exactly.
Yes, and people's tendency not to easily change their minds is one of the major reasons the truth gets out so little. Those in power understand our tendency to anchor in our beliefs and exploit that tendency to their great advantage.
What ever the media and government espouse , think the opposite
Being able to think critically is a rapidly disappearing skill. There is nothing wrong with being able to see your original thoughts were incorrect based on information received.
Being a total prick because your ego gets in the way is where many go wrong.
We are very susceptible to suggestion and repetition as well as being intellectually lazy and subject to group think.
Look no further than the acceptance of the Holohoax as indisputable fact!
This is what I do whenever I feel there is cause for skepticism:
1. Check for Revelation of the Method (RoM) signs. I knew instantly that covid was a psyop when they told us nonsense about a Chinese research team finding two species of snake to be "reservoirs" of the virus, a claim rubbished within the same article by a biosecurity specialist at Sydney University as "complete garbage", pushing out nonsense and then rubbishing it being a typical psyop feature.
2. If there are RoM signs, check to see if there's anything that provides clear evidence of the story being true regardless of the RoM. I've never seen RoM signs in a story that showed signs of being true regardless.
When it comes to other information outside psyops I guess "skin in the game" / "cui bono" is a good criterion to judge by, however, as much as possible I like to rely on the actual evidence. It kind of drives me nuts when people question my claims of a psyop when they cannot discern a motive. If the evidence says something, regardless of whether I can discern a motive or not it is the evidence that guides my thought.
Ignore the MSM as it is good for nothing that you need to live well. I look outside to see if global warming is in effect or go outside to experience it. It snowed here yesterday and this morning it is 19 degrees. For this area, it is nothing close to global warming. Case closed on that issue.
Whatever else going on is mostly stupid or silly especially if it is in the news. It's all about marketing, money, power and control. I have my truth and they have theirs. You will not survive listening to their truth as it is 99% lies and propaganda. Case closed.
What is “my truth”?
Re: "The world is likely to..."
Ask a simple question.
WHO SAID IT? Name the person. When did they say it? Where did they say it? Who did they say it to?
That's journalism. That's need.
If there is no answer, don't trust the statement.. It's not news. It has no "factual" evidence.
Makes sense, logically, rationally and practically. Well done!
I feel your ban! I have been a part time writer on Quora for about 6 years but i have a rather sharp and slicing tendency to "call em as i 'see' em". Always have. I quit trying to 'make small talk'when i was 16. I recently turned 73. Quora Moderators and Bots shadowban much of my work. My thrust is to help others to 'see' their way thru the mucky-muck. I have read Substack now shadowbans and/ or removes some written work.LMFAO. I wish you good fortune.
Hey thanks for the mention Jeremy. Looking forward to tomorrow.
Some very helpful input.
I am an overview person and a people person.
I need solid on-the-ground input for balance.
I try to assess a person's personal integrity via some video viewing.
My radar is not infallible, but tends to be relatively reliable I think.
When I make mistakes, there are always red flags I missed in retrospect.
The knowing deceivers are easier to spot than the self-deceived.
The former are always trying to hide their horns and tails.
The halos of the latter, tend to fade increasingly.
Many people may be conglomerates with various degrees of stability.
Only a minority may be solid rocks.
Even apparently solid rocks can sometimes move, as all know who have lived by rocky bottom rivers or in the mountains.
We can only stay grounded and test rocks regardless, before relying on them.
Well elucidated! I stand by these principles too, and especially since 2020 when I realized I knew even less than I thought I did. As I sing in this video: “it’s not either/or; it’s both and more.” (I mean, not always the latter half of the phrase, but you get what I mean…): https://open.substack.com/pub/sanefrancisco/p/the-navy-blue-venn-diagram
Well said. Have you ever interviewed Ben Davidson? I hear he has a new documentary coming out this week. 😉
Another good rule of thumb is the less polished they appear the more likely they are independent and telling the truth.
Deuteronomy 18:22 is helpful here: "When a prophet speaks... if the thing does not come about or come true... the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."
Is the Telegraph pushed into the Establishment "Left-wing" sector because the Establishment "Right-wing" sector is so crowded? I thought it was a really helpful guide till I spotted that.
Thank you for that information on climate change, including the movement of the treeline. Although a decade ago, the recognition that 9/11 wasn't the work of 19 terrorists started my "wake up" journey I maintained strong conviction of scary AGW until I recognised how completely fraudulent science in general was with covid.
The climate-focused site, Skeptical Science, was my bible. It seemed so reasonable - they lay down all the naysayer arguments and seem to put perfectly reasonable arguments against them as well as allow argument in the comments, supposedly only moderating on the basis of civility and outright nonsense. However, SS sometimes strays into other areas and when they strayed into covid and censored my arguments - in a totally ridiculous manner I might add, labelling my 10 points a Gish Gallop when I only put 10 points to try to make a convincing case - I pondered whether they censored perfectly good disagreement arguments on climate too.
What kept me hooked was the seemingly simple science of it: CO2 exists in a trace amount and has a warming effect even at that trace level and we're pumping gigatonnes into the atmosphere every year so - with an increasing temperature - it makes perfect sense. Moreover, it wasn't as if the authorities spoke with one voice on it as they do with the scamdemic for example. In Australia where we make a lot of money from our coal,a number of politicians spoke against it and it seemed to me that any scientists speaking against it were funded by the fossil fuel companies. I've since learnt, however, that although some of them probably are funded by the fossil fuel companies others are not and now as CC is much more mainstream we can see how scientists supporting CC are supported by the government.
I'm still suffering cognitive dissonance though, however, there is no way that I can ever feel any fear about anything the authorities try to make me feel afraid of again. I couldn't do it. What makes me afraid is the cravenness of "the people", not those in power.
Have you ever stood inside a greenhouse? I stood inside one with over 1000 parts per million of CO2, when outside is around 400. I should have boiled and died, if I were to believe mainstream global warming propaganda.
There isn’t any evidence that CO2 has a warming effect, is the point.
CO2 is critical for all life on Earth. Lower CO2 means less life. That’s why they want to lower CO2; they want fewer humans.
I don't wish to doubt, however, I thought plants took in CO2 and pushed out oxygen so I'm wondering why there would be over 1000 PPM of CO2 in a greenhouse?
When I believed in AGW I thought the doubters also accepted CO2 as being a greenhouse gas but didn't accept that it was particularly problematic.
Because the CO2 was being pumped into the greenhouse, which is why they grow so well.
OK, thanks. I didn't realise they did that. Very interesting.
So interesting SS banned you on your first post.
Thank you for your very informative reply - none of it was remotely teaching me how to suck eggs, I guess I'm horribly ignorant. I shall look up Eschenbach.