COLLECTIVE INSANITY

"Jonathan" wrote in message


Speaking about "COLLECTIVE INSANITY"

You seem to be a borg like collective as being represented by more than
one Usenet soul.

Why is that?

How many Jonathan's are there?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Jonathan" wrote in message


Speaking a little further about your "COLLECTIVE INSANITY":

The raw soup and nuts gauntlet of this Usenet anti-think-tank from
infomercial LLPOF hell is getting yet another badly needed kick in their
private parts. This time it's getting delivered by CARL ZIMMER's steel
toed boot.

A whole lotta liars / By CARL ZIMMER
Published: December 26, 2006

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...a313acb656a366
(David Polewka)" wrote in
message oups.com

Different species may be prone to different levels of
deception. Solitary animals may evolve to be more
honest than animals that spend long lives in big societies.
If that is true, then humans may be exquisitely primed to
deceive.

That's real good stuff, way better off than I could have said it. As
"big societies" of humans, we're clearly a morphed species that's
born-again and otherwise cultivated to lie our infomercial spewing butts
off, and then some.

I'm not at all sure that our local evolution had much of anything but
negative impact upon our frail DNA code, especially of our faith based
LLPOF code that's seriously running us amuck.

If our faith and thereby DNA is supposedly linked to a common cosmic
creator or whatever source of ET intelligent design, then something
terribly bad went seriously wrong along the way, especially since
there's so much of absolutely nifty DNA code that so many other complex
species of life (millions of years older than us) still has to work
with, that we've somehow lost track of or otherwise having disposed of.

Sort of makes you wonder, as to where the heck our extremely frail and
clearly deficient human DNA originated, doesn't it.

I have a fairly substantial shopping list of absolutely nifty DNA codes
that most of us humans could really use to our benefit. How about
yourself?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Jonathan wrote:



Oh Please! I suppose you think Chinese 'agents' are frequenting
this ng? And the post is just an exercise in applying the concepts
of complexity science. For instance.



You shot the damn thing all over the place, it's going to take under a
minute for somebody in China to do a Google groups search looking for
anybody who's trying to cause trouble at the Beijing Olympics.
I'm willing to bet they do that to.
If I were them, I would.

Define the difference between a fragile and resilient system
Find the weakness of the fragile system
Apply stress to the fragile system at its critical point
in order to maximize the weakness and effect
of the applied disturbance.

Just so you can 'see' how this form of activism works
by using another real world example, I'll review how Janet Jackson
and Justin Timberlake used this idea for their own purposes.

The system....a highly censored mass media
Its weakness....live tv
Its critical point....the Super Bowl
(It's a critical point since the entire nation is
watching, maximizing the weakness....live tv)

The disturbance.....a briefly bared breast

Normally, such a disturbance, brief and mild
nudity, would hardly raise an eyebrow.
But since it was applied to a highly rigid (censored) system
and applied at the very weakest point (live tv)
and during the biggest event (critical point) of the year (Super Bowl)
the disturbance maximized the potential effect
Instead of being a ho-hum event, it was the talk of the nation
the next day.



It was a truly desperate and laughably bad publicity stunt by two people
whose careers were in decline.
And she wasn't naked, she had a pasty over her nipple...which was really
pathetic, as if you're going to shock people with nudity, at least
actually get naked.

In addition, the effect was further maximized
by the design of the disturbance itself
By combining the opposite extremes in possibility
the disturbance (opposing symbolism) created
the maximum controvery.

One extreme possibility for that wardrobe disturbance
would be a self serving publicity stunt designed
only to sell things.
The other extreme in possibility is that the disturbance
was an expression of beauty, and a protest against
censorship.



It was the former, let me guarantee you.
Next, you'll be going on about Madonna's revolutionary political acts. :-D

Pat

"Jonathan" wrote in message


Here's a better argument against your "COLLECTIVE INSANITY" ruse on
steroids:

If you don't or can't believe in the past; What's the argumentative
point of the future?

For example; Our species of evolution is not limited to whatever's
terrestrial, nor have we emerged our selves so quickly from the muck of
mother Earth's happenstance of random creations, from the likes of her
slime as having mutated into such vast multitudes of such highly complex
life without a little help from above. In my good book of deductive
common sense, Earth simply isn't old enough. Possibly via icy
spacebergs or that of an icy proto-moon that's hosting sufficiently
protected forms of intelligent panspermia or larger forms of life, would
go a long ways towards helping to explain as to what gave the relatively
newish likes of Earth the all essential kick-start for life as we know
it.

Dr. Velikovsky may have made more than his fair share of research
mistakes, but that's only because he was human, meaning that at the time
he'd simply accomplished the best he could. Fortunately, our Velikovsky
was sufficiently correct on a number of issues, more than enough to
benefit humanity. Venus is in fact a newish planetary example of active
planetology in the makings, of gradually becoming a viable life
sustaining (Earth-II) planet for those of us that are becoming smart
enough to tie our own shoe laces. John Ackerman deserves some equal
credit, as being of an open mindset that doesn't knowingly exclude or
otherwise banish evidence.

This following GUTH infomercial rant is simply being shared on behalf of
the old truth and nothing but the truth gipper. For starters, I bet the
likes of National Geographic isn't exactly one of the good guys, any
more so than GOOGLE/NOVA or a good dozen other mainstream publishers of
our government's infomercial lies upon lies, that as such wouldn't so
much as dare not publish and/or produce whatever's on behalf of our
government's pet agenda.

In spite of what we've been told is the truth, whereas in many instances
there's simply no hard evidence, much less impirical that proves
Shakespeare contributed each and every word of his works, and there's no
such evidence that our moon came from within Earth, any more so than we
have proof of having walked on the moon as scribed to us by the one and
only NASA/Apollo koran.

There is however empirical evidence that Columbus was by far not the
first to have discovered America, as well as we have empirical evidence
that the bible was not properly scribed as in it's original format and
honest context, just as we have empirical evidence that Cathars were in
fact exterminated by the Pope of their day, and otherwise empirical
evidence that our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) lied his mostly
pro-white and nearly fachous born-again infomercial spewing butt off, as
of nearly continually.

Other than all of that, and then some, there's actually lots of our
officially recorded history that's skewed off course and gotten
sufficiently published as the supposed truth past the point of no
return, along with our having those of the Old Testament mindset that
would just as soon kill off and eat their own kind, just like in the
"Phineas T Puddleduck" world where apparently only non-jews are the bad
guys.

This next rant is for those of us honest village idiots that have had
just about enough of their mainstream status quo crapolla.

The raw soup and nuts gauntlet of this disinformation spewing Usenet's
anti-think-tank, that's from their very own cultivated infomercial LLPOF
hell, is getting yet another badly needed kick in their private parts.
This time it's getting delivered by one of their own CARL ZIMMER's steel
toed boot.

A whole lotta liars / By CARL ZIMMER
Published: December 26, 2006

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...a313acb656a366
(David Polewka)" wrote in
message oups.com

Different species may be prone to different levels of
deception. Solitary animals may evolve to be more
honest than animals that spend long lives in big societies.
If that is true, then humans may be exquisitely primed to
deceive.

That's really good stuff, way better off than I could have said it. As
"big societies" of humans, we're clearly a morphed species that's
born-again and otherwise cultivated to lie our infomercial spewing butts
off, and then some.

I'm not at all sure that our local/terrestrial evolution had all that
much of anything but negative impact upon our frail DNA code, especially
of our faith-based LLPOF code that's seriously running our species
amuck.

If our faith in whatever and thereby faith-based DNA code is supposedly
linked to a common cosmic creator or whatever source of ET intelligent
design, then something terribly bad went seriously wrong along the way,
especially since there's so much of absolutely nifty DNA code that so
many other complex species of life (millions of years older than us)
still have at their disposal to work with, that we've somehow lost track
of or otherwise having knowingly disposed of.

Sort of makes you wonder, as to where the heck our extremely frail and
clearly deficient human DNA originated, doesn't it.

I have a fairly substantial shopping list of absolutely nifty DNA codes
that most of us humans could really use to our benefit. How about
yourself? GOT BETTER DNA ?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Jonathan wrote:



Oh Please! I suppose you think Chinese 'agents' are frequenting
this ng? And the post is just an exercise in applying the concepts
of complexity science. For instance.



You shot the damn thing all over the place, it's going to take under a
minute for somebody in China to do a Google groups search looking for
anybody who's trying to cause trouble at the Beijing Olympics.
I'm willing to bet they do that to.
If I were them, I would.



And they would see this 'plan' has been showing up all
over the internet for over two years now. This is about
expectations, not reality. It's something I've learned
in stock trading. When people strongly anticipate some
event, good or bad, they assume the very best or worst
case scenarios in advance. They strongly overreact beforehand.
This is the core force behind the self fullfilling prophecy.
The mere expectations of good or bad makes
one or the other into reality.

Look at what happened to the Super Bowl half time show
since then, and live tv in general since then. Watered
down shows on tape delay. The half time shows used
to be worth watching, now they are not.

The only way they can prevent the politicizing of the
Olympics is to ruin it. Their great coming out party, designed
to /legitimize/ communism and benign dictatorships will
fizz out on them. Or if the protests do happen, they will
react so strongly and set off the non linear response
themselves.

If everyone expects something to happen.....it will.

And either way is good for democracy and bad for
dictatorships. The only way I believe they can prevent
a disastrous outcome for the Olympics, once everyone
assumes they will be politicized, is to relax political repression
beforehand and make protests a ho hum thing in China.

That would be just fine...also.

But they won't, they will go the other way and create
the last straw. Once the expectations are established
they can't win.



Next, you'll be going on about Madonna's revolutionary political acts.


You still don't appreciate the power of symbolism, especially when
applied in a mathematically ideal way. When the opposite extremes
are present in one system, or work of art, the potential becomes
virtually unlimited. Such as...


Event....which-is-which (which opposite extreme is it)


Mona Lisa's smile....pleasant or devious
Non violent protests....war or peace
Dante....heaven or hell
Janet and Justin....disgust or beauty
Kathy (sweat-shop) Lee.....protector or abuser of children
The MX missile.....peacekeeper or first strike warstarter
Madonna.....virgin or slut g Remember her first hit?

Truth.....science or religion


If you can't tell which opposite extreme the event
or system represents, the maximum possible is
attracted to that event. As the event no longer defines
itself, the observer is allowed the greatest possible
range of reactions, so the /observer defines the system/.
The event become entirely dependent on the observer, this
is how an event increases its connectivity to the greatest
possible.

Take a look at this picture again, what is
the symbolism and how strongly does this
simple hand gesture represent opposite extremes?

http://www.faluninfo.net/gallery/photo.asp?ID=101

A child and the Falun Gong
Complete innocence or the most dangerous cult?

The opposite system specific extremes in one
simple act, when 'performed' in front of the entire
world has the potential to move the world.

It's how to create the greatest possible reaction from
the smallest possible disturbance. It's how systems
self organize and take on a life of their own.

Just as evolution combines the opposite extremes
of genetics and mutation. Which represent the opposites
of fixed rules and chaos/randomness. When the
opposites are fully interacting, the dynamic attractor
of natural selection spontaneously forms.

And Nature takes over.

Complexity science has...abstractly...modeled nature.
Which means the properties of nature can be applied
to designing a business, or a work of art, or even
politics....anything at all having to do with
real world complex dynamic systems.

Humans believe they can control natural systems, it's
what dictatorships are all about. But in truth the more
they try to control nature, the more it fights back.

The Beijing Olypmics are clearly a critical or tipping
point for that system. All protests, against communism
for democracy, for the Falun Gong or religious freedom
....whatever...should focus at that point.

That should be the message, or the plan, and it should
be shouted as loud, as often and everywhere possible.
Along with examples of how to properly use
symbolism the most effective way.



s






Pat

"Jonathan" wrote in message


The US has stepped into the enforcement role of the
UN voluntarily. Someone has to do it, without the
rule of law the hope for a civilized world
is a pipe-dream.

Besides being a pagan born-again liar, and a brown-nosed suck-up to the
mainstream status quo, you have an ulterior motive, don't you.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:22ffb5bf279ca336fa6f442227aca158.49644@mygate .mailgate.org...
"Jonathan" wrote in message


Here's a better argument against your "COLLECTIVE INSANITY" ruse on
steroids:

If you don't or can't believe in the past; What's the argumentative
point of the future?



On this point, the insanity is believing the past is a vehicle
for predicting the future. Reverse that. Instead of using
rational objective science to examine in detail what
already exists ( the past), to build a way of extrapolating
into the future. We do just the opposite.

We use our imagination to project current general trends
into the future, as a means of unraveling the past.

For instance, on the subject of God, or the creation of
the universe.I use this inverse logic to form a completely
rational or science based concept of God.

Inverse the method and you inverse the results.

Instead of God being some fanciful and subjective
concept, it becomes scientific. Here goes.

Using evolution, what are the general trends?
From lifelessness to one celled, to the first
two celled marine life, to plants, animals
and finally humans and intelligence.

A clear trend of ever more capable of intelligent
creations. Project that trend into the distant
future.

Evolutionary processes should someday naturally
create a level of wisdom that has the God-life power
of creation.

So God comes at ....the end...of the evolutionary ladder.
NOT the beggining.

When this universe naturally evolves Gods, they will
create. They may be the source of creation for
a new universe that does not now exist. So maybe
our universe was created in the same way, by
a previously existing naturally evolved emergent
property. God is now a generic emergent property.
Not any particular being or technology, but
a property that emerges as a universe dies
which allows a new universe to be created.

A cyclic model. Where universes evolve what they
need to produce another before they die.
Our evolved Gods might be dark energy and matter
in this view. A new property that completes
the cycle to the next universe.

The most recent cyclic model is discussed
in detail here.
http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/






For example; Our species of evolution is not limited to whatever's
terrestrial, nor have we emerged our selves so quickly from the muck of
mother Earth's happenstance of random creations, from the likes of her
slime as having mutated into such vast multitudes of such highly complex
life without a little help from above. In my good book of deductive
common sense, Earth simply isn't old enough.


Evolutionary creation follows a power law. Which is just
like the behavior of an earthquake. With countless small
evolutionary improvements, and the occasional huge
step forward. In short, the very biggest leaps of
creation happen almost overnight. With long periods
of only minor changes. And as a niche becomes
more fully filled, this process accelerates.



Possibly via icy
spacebergs or that of an icy proto-moon that's hosting sufficiently
protected forms of intelligent panspermia or larger forms of life, would
go a long ways towards helping to explain as to what gave the relatively
newish likes of Earth the all essential kick-start for life as we know
it.


Perhaps the greatest discovery of chaos theory is that
random interactions are the source of self organization.
The second law provides the complexity needed for
spontaneous order to form. This need for complex
and random interactions are the reason why
water is considered the ideal medium for life.

Once the earth cooled and fluid motion became
stable and dominant, life should evolve.

In article ,
said:

[ re Janet Jackson, Super Bowl ]

And she wasn't naked, she had a pasty over her nipple...which was
really pathetic, as if you're going to shock people with nudity,
at least actually get naked.

Correction: she was wearing a piece of jewelry which surrounded the
nipple but had a hole in the middle.

--
William December Starr

Michael Crichton is an asshole.

"William December Starr" wrote in message
...
In article ,
said:

[ re Janet Jackson, Super Bowl ]

And she wasn't naked, she had a pasty over her nipple...which was
really pathetic, as if you're going to shock people with nudity,
at least actually get naked.

Correction: she was wearing a piece of jewelry which surrounded the
nipple but had a hole in the middle.



Like this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipple_shield


--
William December Starr

Michael Crichton is an asshole.

"Jonathan" wrote in message


Here's one more shot for the old "COLLECTIVE INSANITY" gipper.

We're being silly boys again, arnt we. Once again there's born-again
liars and then there's borgs or rather brown-nosed minions of the status
quo that simply can't tell one lie from another.

A whole lotta liars

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...31269616317291
"zzpat" wrote in message

All this lying in the animal kingdom reminds me of Fox News. It's too
bad Fox doesn't have "fair and balanced" stories from two crustaceans;
one lying his ass off and being praised, the other telling the truth and
being vilified.

I say that loot talks, doesn't it. But do these serious cults (aka
Skull and Bones or Old Testament whatevers) even care about loot nearly
as much as they do about sustaining their seat of power?

If a badly given anti-ruse is worth doing, you either do it at whatever
the cost or simply allow it to transpire by way of others. What's new
about orchestrated disinformation wars; isn't it what we do best?

Planting phony-baloney information (good or bad news) as supposed
evidence is certainly a good part of any half-assed plan of action,
isn't it.

Creating those supposed facts as newly uncovered or discovered evidence,
and if need be contributing whatever moles that you can rather easily
tear apart, is pretty much status quo of achieving whatever it takes in
order to win a given info war, even if it's a mutually perpetrated and
extremely spendy and unavoidably lethal cold-war that goes on and on for
decades.

Remember, in war there are no rules.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG