Tweet
hey gang,
I am hoping maybe I can convince the mods to make this thread a regular one here in the lounge, for the following reason. There is a lot of confusion about researching information that is considered conspiratorial in nature. There are two issues that seem to confuse people. The first issue is what the different sources mean, and where they become relevant to an issue. The second issue is how source materials become relevant to an inquiry.
There is also a tendency for disinformation to spread when there is perhaps a legitimate inquiry that might expose a particular issue. Many people here expect a magical source to come about and reveal something fantastic. It does not work that way. So what are some modes of research that we can use?
Correlation. Carl Jung famously describes a beach with a few items cast about. He describes how a Western trained mind looking for linear causality would not see much of anything. he goes on to describe how through relationship to the objects we find correlations: A shoe, a hairbrush, perhaps a beach towel... None of these objects alone means anything, but together they could indicate the presence of someone.
When looking at a conspiracy there might be information in a lot of places. One must find a way to take this data out and see the relationship between many little facts. Many of these facts can be overlooked!let me stop here and say it is my policy to always give examples. lets use the Billy Meier case as an example. Meier is thought, to this day to be a fraud. I am not so sure. Meier was meticulous and able to type almost two hundred words a minute with one arm (lost his arm in an accident). Initially when his data was presented in the seventies, nobody could duplicate his photos or films of flying saucers. These are all things you guys can look up BTW.
Later on, Meier was shot at, his family threatened and suddenly it was discovered that some of his space photos were taken out of books, and that some of his photos had models used in their construction. The official line is that Meier was just a very good Fakir. But lets look at some correlative material for a moment. First off, how did his photos change so much? originally they were found to be authentic, no models used, and no technology existed to make the effects he would later be accused of using.
And the materials stolen from his photos? the aliens pictured were Dean Martin's showgirls! The pics came out of science books...What happened here?
Materials that were analyzed at a lab and found to be not of this world also dissapeared. And his wife found models that Meier constructed for his pictures.
now lets look at some other correlations. Meier was shot at and threatened allegedly by the government. This was documented. Meier's family and the compound where he lived was harassed as well. And what of Meier? a man who was very bright, very able...could do no better than to pull pictures out of common books and hope no one would discover them?
What the situation as a whole tells me is that if I correlate all these facts, whether Meier is real, or not, he is being set up. First off, disinformation is such that when the internet started opening up, which correlates with when Meier's materials were labelled as fraudulent, it would be easy to put out very similar materials that were fraudulent. Similar pics, and similar films, etc. That makes more sense, knowing how meticulous this man was, than the fact that in the space of time his materials suddenly looked amateurish when the original tapes, some of which still exist, do not look amateurish at all.
Meier has gone on record as not fighting these accusations. He happens to not want to fight, and to be left alone and may well feel that his family might be killed.
Ok so I gave a very roughshod example here. I am not trying to argue that Meier is 100% and there is a lot more to this...But what I want people to see is that there is no one source, or another to appeal to here. You have to look at motive (to shut Billy Up) , opportunity (the internet) and patterns that make sense. You have to know for example that Meier was a pascifist, a man who wanted to be left alone...you have to know that many people came to him and requested his materials and that when they left his home, any disinfo agent savy could then make materials that were fraudulent and claim they were his... You have to know that his original films, at the time, were declared impossible to fake. You have to know that people who attacked Billy like Colonel Corco had agendas....
I have created a thesis and point of view from many different sources. When people were interviewed about Meier, when his past is examined, we fill in more and more blanks. Eventually we get to a point where we can make a judgement about the data, but it does not occur in a vacuum.
This is good for a first post, chime in if there is an interest.
I am hoping maybe I can convince the mods to make this thread a regular one here in the lounge, for the following reason. There is a lot of confusion about researching information that is considered conspiratorial in nature. There are two issues that seem to confuse people. The first issue is what the different sources mean, and where they become relevant to an issue. The second issue is how source materials become relevant to an inquiry.
There is also a tendency for disinformation to spread when there is perhaps a legitimate inquiry that might expose a particular issue. Many people here expect a magical source to come about and reveal something fantastic. It does not work that way. So what are some modes of research that we can use?
Correlation. Carl Jung famously describes a beach with a few items cast about. He describes how a Western trained mind looking for linear causality would not see much of anything. he goes on to describe how through relationship to the objects we find correlations: A shoe, a hairbrush, perhaps a beach towel... None of these objects alone means anything, but together they could indicate the presence of someone.
When looking at a conspiracy there might be information in a lot of places. One must find a way to take this data out and see the relationship between many little facts. Many of these facts can be overlooked!let me stop here and say it is my policy to always give examples. lets use the Billy Meier case as an example. Meier is thought, to this day to be a fraud. I am not so sure. Meier was meticulous and able to type almost two hundred words a minute with one arm (lost his arm in an accident). Initially when his data was presented in the seventies, nobody could duplicate his photos or films of flying saucers. These are all things you guys can look up BTW.
Later on, Meier was shot at, his family threatened and suddenly it was discovered that some of his space photos were taken out of books, and that some of his photos had models used in their construction. The official line is that Meier was just a very good Fakir. But lets look at some correlative material for a moment. First off, how did his photos change so much? originally they were found to be authentic, no models used, and no technology existed to make the effects he would later be accused of using.
And the materials stolen from his photos? the aliens pictured were Dean Martin's showgirls! The pics came out of science books...What happened here?
Materials that were analyzed at a lab and found to be not of this world also dissapeared. And his wife found models that Meier constructed for his pictures.
now lets look at some other correlations. Meier was shot at and threatened allegedly by the government. This was documented. Meier's family and the compound where he lived was harassed as well. And what of Meier? a man who was very bright, very able...could do no better than to pull pictures out of common books and hope no one would discover them?
What the situation as a whole tells me is that if I correlate all these facts, whether Meier is real, or not, he is being set up. First off, disinformation is such that when the internet started opening up, which correlates with when Meier's materials were labelled as fraudulent, it would be easy to put out very similar materials that were fraudulent. Similar pics, and similar films, etc. That makes more sense, knowing how meticulous this man was, than the fact that in the space of time his materials suddenly looked amateurish when the original tapes, some of which still exist, do not look amateurish at all.
Meier has gone on record as not fighting these accusations. He happens to not want to fight, and to be left alone and may well feel that his family might be killed.
Ok so I gave a very roughshod example here. I am not trying to argue that Meier is 100% and there is a lot more to this...But what I want people to see is that there is no one source, or another to appeal to here. You have to look at motive (to shut Billy Up) , opportunity (the internet) and patterns that make sense. You have to know for example that Meier was a pascifist, a man who wanted to be left alone...you have to know that many people came to him and requested his materials and that when they left his home, any disinfo agent savy could then make materials that were fraudulent and claim they were his... You have to know that his original films, at the time, were declared impossible to fake. You have to know that people who attacked Billy like Colonel Corco had agendas....
I have created a thesis and point of view from many different sources. When people were interviewed about Meier, when his past is examined, we fill in more and more blanks. Eventually we get to a point where we can make a judgement about the data, but it does not occur in a vacuum.
This is good for a first post, chime in if there is an interest.
Comment