Mass Knowledge and The Conspiracy To Confuse

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I have been thinking for many years now that since there is so much information out there, most of the time conflicting knowledge, it is no wonder that so many are confused. I too am guilty of this.

I am sure that there are many on this board who are confused as to what exactly I am "about." I will tell you, part of this obfuscation is due to over-exposure of conflicting messages.

I have a question. Is there a concerted effort to keep the masses perpetally confused as to what is true and what is false? You have this one scientist/group which says "Blah, blah, blah." is true, then you have another scientist/group which says, "blah blah, blah," is true. Which one do you believe? If you choose one to believe, do you ever really know if you have chosen the correct one?

Of course, all of this filters into all areas of life. It doesn't matter if it is religion, politics, science or whatever else you can imagine. There is always information that states something is onme way and another piece of information that states that it is diametrically different, or at least different enough to cause conflict.

Then you have people, like myself, which take a little from each side and say, "Well, this is what I believe." Does this not just further obfuscate the situation, regardless of what that situation may be? Any thoughts?




posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I don't want to turn this into a theological discussion, but I found something that I was aware of, but I didn't know the exact numbers on it.. It is from a religious site that is why I said I didn't want it to turn into a theological discussion.


Knowledge has certainly increased within this generation almost beyond imagination! In fact according to research studies, the total store of human knowledge is now doubling every eight years."

80% of all the scientists who have ever lived are alive today. Every minute they add 2000 pages to man's scientific knowledge, and the scientific material they produce every 24 hours would take one person 5 years to read. About a half-million new books are published every year.

Increasing knowledge

Wow...


I mean, I knew that we increase knowledge about 10-fold every year, but, wow... Some will ask, "Well, how does that play into what you are saying?" Well, can you imagine how much of that knowledge is contradictory to other knowledge that develops at the same time?

[edit on 22-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Strange, at the end of the page of the site I quoted, it states this


In our day & age "knowledge" has certainly "increased". But although the so-called "developed" countries such as the U.S. claim to have the most "advanced" & expensive educational systems the world has ever known, yet they've been turning out the most confused, ignorant & violent children they've ever produced!



The strange thing is, I didn't come across this site until AFTER I had already made this post...


[edit on 22-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth
 


What is the alternative? To have less information out there? A lot of what researchers do when they write books is sift through all the info on a particular topic to bring together the best of the best. Every individual has to make up his/her mind just like this when forming an opinion on any topic.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Well, I suppose unless something is throughly researched and proven without much question, it shouldn't even be released to the general public. I mean, if you have a theory and there are major points of contention, which is a fact with most theories, then how can they be parroted around as the "truth?"



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Well, I suppose unless something is throughly researched and proven without much question, it shouldn't even be released to the general public. I mean, if you have a theory and there are major points of contention, which is a fact with most theories, then how can they be parroted around as the "truth?"


I thought we were kind of talking about paralysis of analysis (if you will), the idea that you examine every angle of an issue, and no longer have an idea of what to think. But I think this is not always the end result of research/inquiry sometimes a truth(s) does emerge, and one can create a theory (or doesn't think s/he is confused, but instead things have been made clear)...

[edit on 22-12-2007 by Raoul Duke]



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
I thought we were kind of talking about paralysis of analysis (if you will), the idea that you examine every angle of an issue, and no longer have an idea of what to think.


Well, yeah, that is kind of what we are discussing here. I just wonder if there may be a method to the madness. Perhaps the powers that be release so much knowledge and information as a way to keep the masses in a state of confusion.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   
We are the power that Be.


People are not subject to anyone elses whims. If we wish to seperate wisdom from knowledge, we can do so. The expansion of knowledge does not make us better people, unless we leverage the knowledge into wise decisions.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I get really confused too with all the information out there. I read a lot on conspiracies and other stuff but it's hard know exactly what's really true or not. I like to read all sides of anything before I come to any conclusions.



posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by MissInformation
I get really confused too with all the information out there. I read a lot on conspiracies and other stuff but it's hard know exactly what's really true or not. I like to read all sides of anything before I come to any conclusions.


Missinformation, well, the trouble is that there are bits and pieces of truth everywhere. However, when you take these bits and pieces from two differing information pieces, you encounter some problems, especially if those information pieces are in stark disagreement.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth


Well, yeah, that is kind of what we are discussing here. I just wonder if there may be a method to the madness. Perhaps the powers that be release so much knowledge and information as a way to keep the masses in a state of confusion.


You should take a look at this article, in it some one who is supposedly a former covert agent, talks about psy ops used against the general population. Just like the Nazis said if you repeated a lie enough people would believe it, this kind of thing may still be going on today (from the powers that be)...



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   
The current state of confusion is not the result of a modern day conspiracy. It is the result of a "complicity of convenience" that occurred around 350 years ago when science separated from "natural philosophy". Prior to this, the quadrivium educational system studied nature based on Pythagorean harmonic science, but this organizing principle was suppressed and ultimately dropped, leading to the fragmentation we see today.

It was Galileo who recommended in a letter that the study of nature should separate from music, astrology, alchemy, etc., in order to simply report on findings in nature while not interpreting them in any way. Under duress in the Italian Inquisition, Galileo felt that he and other scientists might be able to coexist with the Church in this way, hoping that nature would eventually reveal itself to be the mind of God. It was the Church's suppression of anything that might reveal God in nature that shaped the scientific method we know today. The lack of a common project and guiding set of principles now encourage brilliant scientists to chase "amusing quirky" aspects of nature and revel in how arbitrary and random things seem. For every hint at a natural order, there is "respected" scientist in the wings to "debunk" it, thus yielding no progress towards a meaningful explanation of the cosmos.

Yet, the facts are that coherence is at the bottom of everything. This is most simply proven in the Gaussian balance between resonance and damping found in everything. The electron shells of an atom resonate into harmonically spaced shells just as our solar system resonated from a swirl of plasma into harmonically spaced orbits. Life emerged from the bonding properties of carbon-12 - the most stable and resonant atom used as the international standard for atomic weight - yet, most scientists still believe life is a one in a billion chance. Truth is, it is surely very common as other solar systems organized harmonically like ours with a perfectly balanced Earth-like orbit containing lots of sticky carbon-12.

Everything is harmonic, forming geometric structure from a background damping field. All of the cardioid shapes in life forms are polar Gaussian distributions of resonating atoms. This is the essential Hermetic knowledge going back to the Egyptians and brought together by Pythagoras. But strangely Science does not have a unified field of harmonic science. Why? Because scientists continue to remain complicit with western religion by hiding these simple facts in a pervasive methodology (not a conspiracy any longer) that suppresses coherence. Whether you want to say this coherence is proof of God is your own business, but it is certainly there. The last thing Science wants to do is suggest intelligence might be behind the cosmos as it would break the complicity of convenience central to the scientific method and, thus, "respectability".

To change this would require the redefinition of the scientific method. We would need to reintegrate philosophy and harmonic science (presently banished at the bottom of the humanities) into a recognized and respected interpretive field whose job it is to bring together scientific findings in a meaningful way and distribute wherever people go for answers to life's questions. There are people like myself working to do this, but entirely outside the scope of peer-reviewed science and without a forum (except publishing a book or few articles) to share such information widely. The established regime, fed by the duo of science and religion, are too entrenched and people are too programmed to be turned around through conventional means. As knowledge compounds, things will continue to fragment until an event or series of events occur to break the current stranglehold of ignorance and trigger Enlightenment 2.0.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I don't know about a centralized, goal-directed program intended to confuse, other than what comes out of the White House. What I do see in the media at large may be a sort of "flocking behavior."

I don't watch a lot of commercial television, but one interesting thing I've been seeing in advertising over the past couple years is a change in the presentation of what items cost. Car commercials, for example, often state how much you will SAVE if you buy now, rather than tell you what you will SPEND. Store cards and credit cards often tell you about how much you EARN when you SPEND your money.

A lot of corporations seem to change their names frequently, either because of bad PR or because of mergers, making it difficult to figure out who you're actually doing business with. AT&T is broken up into a handful of smaller companies, including Ameritech, Bell Labs, and Lucent Technologies. Ameritech and a bunch of smaller companies merge to become SBC, which then becomes AT&T.

I don't think the amount of information in our environment has changed much over the years: most of what you know about the world comes to you through the same five senses our distant ancestors had. What has changed is the value our society gives to information. 500 years ago, information wasn't a commodity in the same way it is today. The mere fact that what television program you watch has value, in the context of a capitalist ideology, means there will be people out there trying to get at some of that value. You are a money-making machine and the more predictable and machine-like you behave, the more valuable you are. The more people are trained to react to slogans rather than analytical thinking, the more machine-like they become. Look at our schools: kids aren't taught to think, they're taught to take tests.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Who is confused around here? are you confused SpeakerOftruth ? I have read many of your posts and you seem to be well spoken and knowledgeable.

Sorry to bring this to you but the only people that allow themselves to be confuse is those that chose too be confuse or are too lazy to compare information and come to their own conclusions.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke

You should take a look at this article, in it some one who is supposedly a former covert agent, talks about psy ops used against the general population. Just like the Nazis said if you repeated a lie enough people would believe it, this kind of thing may still be going on today (from the powers that be)...


Yeah, that is something that Hitler said in Mein Kampf. He also said that leaders were fortunate that the masses didn't think.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 11:44 AM
link   

The last thing Science wants to do is suggest intelligence might be behind the cosmos as it would break the complicity of convenience central to the scientific method and, thus, "respectability".


Well, certainly. Science in many ways is like religion. It does not want to accept anything that is contrary to the drivel it has promulagated for centuries. Then they'd might have to admit, "Gee, I guess we were wrong."


[edit on 23-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Who is confused around here? are you confused SpeakerOftruth ? I have read many of your posts and you seem to be well spoken and knowledgeable.




Marg, thank you for the compliment, my friend.


While one may be knowledgeable, one is hard pressed to say that they know anything with any degree of certainty. While I know and believe a lot of things, that which I know and believe is not always without some doubt. You know what I mean?



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I think Groups like ATS are the way to deal with the problem I think you are defining. I think the best anyone can hope for today is to become highly specialized in one aspect of one topic and then join with others with related specialties to advance knowledge. Collaboration is the only way to adequately address an investigation into many issues. Learning to accept this is difficult for many of our most educated in society and this creates a problem where truth is involved. Too many are locked into their narrow view and seemingly incapable of the needed collaboration to arrive at the truth about controversial subjects.

Education will have to become lessons in how to study and do research rather than the teaching and memorization of facts to build upon as there are just to many facts. Truth has become a transient thing at best and having an open mind to that fact is critical to progress.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
I have been thinking for many years now that since there is so much information out there, most of the time conflicting knowledge, it is no wonder that so many are confused. I too am guilty of this.


RIGHT ON!!!!!!!! This was my argument a few years back, but instead of considering my position, I was told to move along. All this information delivered in a confusing way must have a genesis, and this was, and is, my quest. I saw a long time ago the divisional confusion that would be generated.

So, is it true that one of Clinton's last classified presidential orders was to release thousands upon thousands of classified pages? Seems to be true....

But why? The only thing it could do is cause chaos...



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
You have this one scientist/group which says "Blah, blah, blah." is true, then you have another scientist/group which says, "blah blah, blah," is true. Which one do you believe? If you choose one to believe, do you ever really know if you have chosen the correct one?

It has nothing to do with the amount of info available. Its just human nature for people to have a different outlook on various topics and it has been this way since 'forever'. Some people in the past believed the Earth was flat and some believed the Earth was round.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join