This section is specifically designed for people who want to get to know me well, or who like to learn about things in general. This is a disclaimer that if neither of those two apply, the following page is unlikely to be interesting to you.
The page is being updated as was written a few years ago, so take this as it’s raw form.
Key: The links in bold and underline are required, other links are inclusions to help provide extended knowledge if you want to know more.
So. Guess we begin eh… umm… So, this will be filled with a mix of movies, articles, peer-reviewed articles, videos, podcasts, etc etc etc. What I am going to say to start with, is that, it would be much more advantageous to read each bit by bit. Ie, if it says “watch the movie”, do it, THEN read on. If you can’t watch it instantly, don’t rush ahead cause your mind will struggle… a lot. As I will quote it, and bring contextualisation and more depth to the content prior voyeured. Just leave it for a week if you need to and come back when you are ready.
Things here are likely to cause some emotional upheaval, usually… rage… sometimes feelings of sadness, guilt, apathy, etc.
Most of it takes A LONG TIME to absorb. This is categorised to make so many years of my research, streamlined and directly accessible for short term speeding through… but you must understand it is A LOT of data… Take it slowly… if something makes you think a fuckton, absorb it properly with taking as much time as you need to ponder it, (a year, a day, 20 seconds, whatever the fuck you require). Some things I’ve learnt in my life, I took out four years to ponder on and off, before I could return to the subject. You must allow this to be the case for you also. Put yourself first, as is your requirement as a human. But do try and return, because you have a right to also receive the knowledge to advance yourself. Though, it is always your choice. Try not to let me bully you dears ;), cause I will get very very aggressive in some parts of this writing. Due to some of these topics being extremely touchy the more that you know about them. Nobody likes being told they are stupid, and a lot of these things, make you feel stupid or lied to… because sometimes… we either avoid it ourselves, or the information is remade to best suit someone else’s purpose for us. Rather than for the betterment of individualised life.
I hope you enjoy, and also hate, in ways that benefit you :). Good luck :D.
So a good place to start would be to explain why this stuff is important to me, for you specifically to know. Alongside why it correlates to importance.
This is impactful to my individualised relationships, as for networking, I need to be socially connected to my circle of associations. I would rather be amassed with interesting people, who can advance my own knowledge in a wide variety of fields. Rather than people who, for lack of a better phrase, “hold me back” from what people say they admire in me. For instance, I hear a lot “you are a very interesting person”. Yet a lot of those same people, fail to be able to provide things back. They instead regurgitate data that they have heard on TV or etc, which they think I would be interested in. Many people fail to recognise that I myself could watch that same TV excerpt. In that sense, the excerpt would be superior and know the information better, so I would choose the TV over the person. This is never a wise position to be in, when connecting with someone like me.
Though, if you watch the excerpt, and formulate MORE knowledge than was provided, then it is interesting to me. I will sit for hours listening to opinions that people have, even if i don’t agree because its unique to the holder. The more you think on anything, the more ingrained and textured your understanding. No matter if I agree or disagree, I find listening to depth fascinating. No human has all the time in the world, and we are all unique blueprints. I want to hear about other’s blueprints, their lives and their opinions in ways I don’t experience. I like people to have any form of opinion, whether its in agreeance or there is a situation of differing opinion, as long as it is well thought out and I can learn why they believe what they do. This I find, is more rare than it is common. The regurgitation far more the norm unfortunately.
So this is a very large part of who I am, and is integral to how I conduct my life. If you stand next to me and try to push and idea too strongly, I will reject your intelligence on the subject. For the information should convince me itself, never the holder. Ie, if you are what you know, you become weakened by being a disingenuous Self. Ie, anyone can make you believe something, what you are relaying could be wrong, even though you are 100% sure of yourself. In 10 years you may feel very differently towards your original concept, so swearing by anything is childish. You may still agree with yourself, but you will definitly know it better and more indepthly and some “parts” of the original idea are changed. As if a rocket losing some parts as it enters into space to become the most pure form of itself. Your beliefs are the same, over time they grow and advance and become superior. Forcing your belief onto me through force is arguably, implying you feel no faith in it to do it itself. When I show you a video, I don’t expect you to believe it because of one video, if you think about it when watching it, and it becomes ingrained in your sense of Self that is YOU and only you that does that. You make the decision to take it on, and further it in your psych and build upon it. As that is what you do subconsciously. Ie, there is a lack of bullying here. I won’t ever say “if you don’t believe it you are not my friend.” Though I will definitely say, “If you don’t know anything about it your an idiot” < that may definitely come out of my mouth.
Where this concept comes from with me;
Imagine yourself, mentally… with me sitting in a low cut dress, at a bar, drinking some random beverage and you happen to notice you are sitting close to me.
I am thinking, about things, (as humans are likely to do), and as you engage me into conversation (at whatever timing feels appropriate for you as a specific individual, whether needing a proc‘ from me like a smile or you taking the vice yourself)… I start verbalising what is on my mind. For peer-compatibility, say as an example you are worried about your missing dog. You are likely to say this to people, “sorry, my mind is elsewhere thinking of my dog, excuse my mindlessness in conversation.” My mind engages in topics which massively enthrall me. For example, I may be merely sitting there thinking about the processing capacity of the bottles of liquor on the self behind the bar. How the management organises its ordering process, how many countries on the wall the alcohol drives from, whether russia exports a lot of vodka or needs to import more because of how much they consume (assumption of consumption rates), then i will wonder how many people consume vodka in russia, then i will wonder how many people consume vodka worldwide, then i will think about how highly vodka compares to all the different popular alcohols… etc. For example, in china there is alcohols I had never drunk before, some which look a lot like vodka. Are they compatible in differentiation, ie, is vodka more strong. I know they are made from different things, but wasn’t aware till I bought a small bottle of one, etc etc. If my thoughts are engaging enough, I will when going home, in the next few days likely look up one of those hundred thoughts and answer it.
When you go to talk to me, I might be anywhere in that “line of thought”. You could talk to me at country, at exports, at china and russia, etc. I may have been thinking about one singular line of thought for like an hour before you spoke to me. It is very hard for me to not say, “oh my god, I was just thinking of this fascinating thing!” Now imagine, when I express this to you, you have two options.
So, you are unlikely to have thought of any of those questions. You are not likely to know the consumption rate %s of russian population consumption of vodka, or import or export %s in Russia, where or how its made, whether China’s version of vodka is a bigger seller worldwide, etc. I don’t expect you to mostly. If you know an answer, great. So these are the two options:
1. You divert the conversation to something where you feel you can be impressive in. Or you lie about the former and pretend you know to garner superiority over the female/person in your environment.
2. You ask more questions.
2. I feel you like me.
1. I think your an idiot.
Some background, when someone tells you something, that you feel is wrong, you likely become mad because you feel you are what you know. In this sense, the things I have thought in my mind, are a part of me. When they are rejected as “meaningless”, I feel you think I am meaningless. I do not want to hear, “omfg I know all the things” because you are then useless. You become boring, as you leave no room for development of the species. If you know it all… you must consider where humans are to be the end of knowing. That is sincerely frightening for me. Bitch please, I want to hoverboard yo (popculture phrase)…
Epistemology involves… well. HOW you acquire knowledge. If you sit down and regurgitate to me things that you have heard, I will likely want to know more. Example;
Person 1: “I like xyz.”
Siren: “Really. Interesting. What is it.”
Person 1: “It is abc.”
Siren: “Cool. Do you feel it is a great use of your time?”
Siren: “Cool. Where did you first pick it up as an interest?”
Siren: “That’s interesting. How does it compare with (insert other popular interest I assume your stereotype might enjoy, proc’ing a wide variety of results) in your life?”
Etc etc… Whatever I think is an interesting question for YOU. Specifically the person in the example at the bar, as YOU. I would ask them a specific question. Ie, do they look sad when talking about their interest. Do they look heavily engaged. I will want to learn, what they know, about what they do. I find acquisition of data interesting and I find this interesting about people. Specifically this. What your life means to you. As I hope, in the former 1 and 2, that you also expect the same of what I require for me.
How your brain works can be a fantastic motivator in life. For example, it’s not always what you know, but that you can “absorb” without being overwhelmed.
The point in the former examples is discussing “how to learn”. This is a continuation on that. As it is greatly important to one of the, WHY, you feel the desire to converse with me. The point here, as provided above, was that I do not expect you to know all. I expect you to though, be able to absorb all eventually. This is a complicated subject, as in the Epistemology video series, it is discussed how humans reflectively aim to be omniscient and etc (to paraphrase and derive assumptions from him loosely). My concept for discussion is to show that, as long as you are able to find new things engaging, then you will at least keep up with my questions and not get “super triggered” everytime I ask an insightful question to you :).
Lest, if you don’t like it, you can opt to avoid me :), as I don’t mesh with your sense of Self. This is not bad… as in the 1. example, you sometimes are not meant to hold 7 billion people in your life ;).
So… the video, to say I have watched a lot would be an incredible understatement. The concept of her mind-mapping to absorb data as the chess board. I found fascinating. This is similar to Sherlock Holmes mind mansion discussions. It is worthy, to know your brain can do this. Create mapping software, as one of its many utilisations of data and roles.
The Self and the Other
What the Bleep and Quantum Communication subjects
Cyclic Consumption / Planned Obsolescence
Fiat vs Currency
Corruption of Medical Science
- Scientific Studies: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (Video)
- Study Linking GMOs and Tumors Vindicated Yet Again… MSM Stays Silent (Video)
- The Corporation (Video) – section discussing BGH in particular
- Lies, Damned Lies, and Government Nutrition Advice (Video)
- Sugar Industry Paid Scientists for Favourable Research (Video)
- Sugar Industry Caught Manipulating Health Studies (Video)
- Food Industry Funded Research Bias (Video)
- Patents and risk research: Access to material, corporate control & independent science (Video)
- How Corporations Corrupt Science at the Public’s Expense (Journal)
- Public Universities Get an Education in Private Industry (Article)
- Science’s Worst Enemy: Corporate Funding (Article)
- People don’t trust scientific research when companies are involved (Article)
- Doctor Warns 80% of Medical Studies are Advertisements for Big Pharma (Article)
- Drug companies paying doctors millions, Medicines Australia report reveals (Article)
This is a very hard topic to discuss. As it involves the #Science issue that plagues online interactions today. The “religion of science” issue. In which people follow science as blindly as they follow any doctrine by anyone as long as its written in a “book” or “journal”. As a conceptual comparison to that they are both text documents by people you have not met.
To have a disclaimer before I begin, my opinion of science is that it should either be paid for by the state which is obligated yearly for people to vote on investment areas for research for yearly spending. Such as, “the state invest 2k in research for rabbits”, “2k research into spending of backyard poker games” etc. Such as in the case where europe got 5 million responses on a random issue of time management… people do give a shit, regardless about whether you think all your friends do. Some will and I think its a good decisional theory on application of monetary expenditure on research. Also its better than the current system for researchers who are known to be pushed into very pocketed certain areas over others.
The other option, probably even better, is peer-to-peer investments which lock shareholders from contributing more than a base % of the overall required amount. This works very well from what I read for sole traders themselves, and I believe overall society as a whole functions better without being marketed and hounded by the corporatocracy. I love corporates, I love big business. But similar to spirituality where i do not wish monotheism to eradicate all its competition, I do not like monopolies or duopolies in business. I like data, and I dislike the idea that corporates can pay their way to eliminate duality in their industry. Ie, dont like our drink, well you have to drink it cause 99% of people believe its right for you because there is no research saying otherwise. The issue is popularisation of data to allow it to get into the hands of average people looking for studies. For example, in Australia if I am a member of a community, I have a right to take out a form of citizen card at my local university library and access a limited amount of peer-review journals which are under agreement from the University with that website. Whilst the university might take out, say, 100 website agreements, a local citizen can access maybe 20 website agreements. The issue with this, is that, those websites might be more likely to publish certain studies over others, and etc. You see where I am going with this. That it’s the ability for someone to acquire the data easily, that I find important.
In this sense. When a corporate invests and edits information in a study. To some regard, I have no opinion. If the data is taken from me, I have an opinion. If someone finds out something, and I put my time into seeking it. I feel that I should, through investment, be able to find and access the data. Not have it locked away if the information is valid for my general well being, whether mentally, spirituality, for health affects, for general dinner party bants discussions, etc. I like to access data. If something has not been researched, that is not the debate in this section, the debate is as to whether if something has been researched, and you are blocked from the data, is this acceptable to you? In my research, no. It lessens society, in my opinion.
On the other end of the spectrum, does corporate interest sway research topics away from the progression of society development?
This is a massive topic for me and is on my top 10 lists of, “if you bring this up and poke me the wrong way I might sit and yell viciously at you for an hour about it cause it bothers me so much.” I research a lot of things. I sit and found out something and I’m like :-O. I get excited and run out to tell people, and I am hit with the, “this is not common knowledge and so we don’t believe you,” wall. This in itself is not a problem. I don’t expect people to believe me for no cause. My issue is within; why are some subjects scientifically researched very heavily and not others.
I formulated two opinions; 1, does culture only research things necessary to it at the time to survive (ie, the “it was made before its time” or “they are well before their time” phrases, in which it is eluded that common culture cannot accept a new invention in its current state); 2, that ‘mainstream science’ was being swayed to research things that were not actually of overall interest and was causing problems within the overall conscious state. After a long time, I reasoned that I actually admit it to be both. Under that, the first is fine, the latter is very frightening. The actual issue is, “how much” is the latter occurring and do I believe my culture (the race) is being negatively affected by this. I believe yes, that the corporate sway especially in some countries, is too heavily out of sync with actual human expectations for data.
This thought really surfaced over certain touch points such as religion vs science. As to which I find very interesting because, they are nothing to do with each other. Its like saying my foot gives a shit what my knee does. My body will act regardless of those two regions bickering, they don’t give a shit. Science and religion seem to only conflict due to the reasoning that one has had power that the other developed an interest in, which is fine. The issue is, why current culture believes this, because your average person is very rarely educated in the scientific industry, doesn’t produce peer-reviewed journals and doesn’t read them. Nor as most people priests and scholars of theology and go to church everyday and follow their religious teachings word for word as it is up for interpretation for each denomination of god or deity followed. Yet claims to stand on this front in so much force, to aggressively bash another facet of life which is totally unconnected. It would be like stabbing your foot because your knee claimed it thought it shouldn’t have power to walk near it. You can see that would crush your ability to walk, and detrimental to your entire body.
Okay take an example. Chakras and Nerve plexus are identical. One is an eastern word, one is a western word, for the same thing. Chakras are an avid part of eastern medicine, yet as soon as you bring up the term “chakra” to most mainstream westerners, they laugh. Which confuses me, as they are integral also to western medicine. This is an example of #science, and there are a lot of these examples. In which westerners are made to look stupid because they don’t know their own science, in this example that chakras are a part of the scientific theory and taught on how important they are to the body and spine. As they are taught in eastern religion and medicine. This occurs across a huge varying amount of fields, in which, a lot of this data should be common knowledge. In the same way all Indians know wtf a chakra is, because its base knowledge.
“Does corporate interest sway research topics away from the progression of society development?” But you all know that coca cola gives you energy though. This is not a bad thing, I am giving an example of why corporate swaying of research can hinder the developmental process of a culture as a whole. Ie, dumbing down people by making them just #science rather than actual scientific understanding. To refer to the discussion in Guide 2 about Opinions… people have a lot of opinions, which they claim are inferred by their own scientific community. In which they are likely not, but they claim they are. I believe this is even more amplified by emphasis on paid for science overtly popularised rather than all the scientific industry because some is paid for and therefore promoted.
Every single article which affects a corporate may be put into a PR campaign sent to local media. But every study which hits a peer-review journal may not be pushed and campaigned to be in that same website/newspaper/tv station. The media outlet may only be able to pick a few. Though the latter may be more interesting to people, they will receive the former due to the push from the PR. We were taught when studying Journalism that some companies don’t even change the PR statement faxed over to the newspapers, they will just publish the PR statement, which has already been dressed up like a story, word for word into the news.
Therefore, this is a sore subject for me overall because it affects my ability to communicate with my peers. The more I know, the less I can find people who know what I do. Even if what I know is normal data, it may be mocked due to being counter to mainstream opinions. Ie, fat is bad rather than sugar. Fat is not bad, there is two kinds, like cholesterol. Polyunsaturated and… etc etc… you get the picture. The specific debate on things which should be common knowledge can sometimes be missed due to market agenda.