Observations on things.

[Jd755]

The actual people that come/came here are actually seeing the sites for what they really are

So what are they, really?

 

[nightrider_2000]

Im relatively new here and seen this when first starting out; Apparently ego is the driver to some of these subjects, it can be seen in some posts, so and so said this and they are my favorite author/researcher etc so they must be right because it appeals to me; I like fact based research myself and those topics appeal to me aka nigel cheese battery etc, something that can be experimented with and provide results successful or not; At least once some facts are determined either by math/modelling etc, then we can conjecture on what the true story is;

Speculation will be speculation but speculation is not truth, thats why i think it takes more than just quoting other people, texts, etc, as its all usually biased on what they want to see; its hard to experiment with some of these things due to size, budget etc but at least maybe a little more stringent reasoning as to why your/your reference materials point of view is the 'holy grail and thats that' attitude;
Some posts are interesting, but based solely on speculation/narrative and without factual evidence will be nothing but... sadly it seems there has been so much cover up and revision of history that the waters are dark and muddy indeed....

Anyway good luck to us all in our endeavours!!!

 

[Udjat]

I hope all that have recently reported on this thread understand that you people or whatever you are, on the whole do a great job at being investigative minds. I am honored to be able to discuss or even just read many interesting and creative views of how we are all where we are and how we maybe have gotten here. Please remember there is always some down time and silence is good. It means that maybe people are being reflective as it is winter where I am, and it is cold. A time of reflection and a time of rest, if you can find time to rest.

I know I don't need to stroke anyone's ego here, but I would like to commend everyone that enters this realm. I haven't started my own thread here because I don't think I have the chops to do so, especially after reading many great posts here, but I do love to learn about other takes on the past because it inspires me to keep going, to keep finding signs of life, future, and possibilities.

I am wishing you all well and hope you keep the light on!!! Brr..... time to put more wood on the fire!!!

 

[trismegistus]

So what are they, really?

I don't want to make too many assumptions about those that are here but do not participate but I will anyway.

Between the number of archived and new posts since the site was started in earnest in 2020 there is a massive breadth of content to wade through here on SH. You could quite literally spend years reading through the threads and replies, and I imagine a decent portion of users both registered and guests are doing exactly that. Even now as I look at the site numbers there are 6 registered users on the site, and 35 guests. I suppose you could say that a percentage of that are bot traffic, but even if that number is 50% that is still quite a few users consuming the content here on the site.

It is disappointing that 99% of the registered accounts on here do not participate in the discussions. To place a specific reason as to why that is the case is a fools errand. You could say its because of JD's thoughts on the difficulty in being able to present contradictory ideas and research, you could say its my reasoning that most just come here to read through threads, or udjat's reason of feeling intimidated (I have been in your shoes in that regard when I first came to the original SH, at a certain point I overcame that intimidation and began posting anyway ). Nothing I do or say will change anyone's perspective on why they do or do not participate here.

I do think that opening the site up to more "mainstream" audiences via YT invited many people here who are merely "consumers" of content here. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but to your point it does little in terms of driving the research forward.

I do resonate with Udjats statement regarding times of rest versus restlessness. Sites like this do have an ebb and flow to them, and currently there is little traffic on this site. Compare that to 2021 and our 100+ page coronavirus thread where you'd often find 5-10 posts a day it is quite a big difference in traffic (whether you agreed with that thread existing in the first place is another discussion).

All I can offer in terms of solace is that as long as we have the money to keep running the servers and can upkeep the site with moderation there will always be a place for additional research when the fancy strikes any particular researcher to contribute. Whether that is a long-time poster with a eureka moment in their ongoing research, or a new face with a fresh perspective I hold out hope that will continue so long as there is a platform like ours to do it in.

 

[Jd755]

For what its worth I have the feeling that most of the historical record as we probably all have been taught it when young, is invented. Certainly from years of reading academic papers especially going backwards to seek out the papers upon which the one I have just read is based on, they do love citing references to their peers and predecessors do academics, the trail always collapses down to an opinion put forward by someone about some document most often that I cannot track down in digital form.
Finding out which institution holds an accessible paper version is a job in itself and often its an academic institution which doesn't allow Joe public to read their material.

There is no appetite amongst researchers outside of academia, nor for that matter within, to invent, test and establish a methodology that is able to establish a likelihood of veracity based on the evidence available which is flexible enough to be updateable when new evidence comes to light.
I'm not even sure such a method could be developed.

That leaves an open field that gets filled with opinion and speculation based on opinion aka the dogs breakfast we have today.
This is an ideal place to implant an invented history to create an impression of being the correct history and for the vast majority of people that's perfectly okay as they have little or no interest in history and even less in the accuracy of history.

For oddbals like me who know something is wrong but cannot put a handle on it, so I scrabble around looking at details of what is actually there and try my level best to avoid falling into the belief trap, as alluring as it is, it becomes very frustrating to the point where I have to stop and look at things from a new angle.

Its why I feel quite sure most of the historical record is invented as in not in the least bit accurate as a record of the passing of events. There is no methodology for checking veracity so the inventors have free rein to come up with whatever belief or opinion they invent and push it in whatever way they can. Some of it gets traction some of it doesn't. Personalities come and go throughout the historical industry if I may put it that way and the dogs breakfast endures.

I doubt there is anyone alive who knows the accuracy of any event that occurs during their lifetime that they did not experience personally. With every telling and retelling things change sometimes subtly sometimes markedly but we alive today have "the internet" and so can see events in "real time" so we are clued up right.

It doesn't take much effort to discover that video, the primary product consumed by the masses, is a literal piece of piss to make an event look real but its just code running in a machine. It takes a bit more effort to learn to recognise machine writing in digital and print form but its doable. But those born in this century are trained constantly from very young to trust what our eyes see and our ears hear contained within the internet. We are also taught to graze and repeat what we see and hear never encouraged to go into the detail always instead to rely on the big picture being presented to the point where we defend things we actually know nothing about.
In my youth it was printed articles and television today its internet.

Effort these days amounts to compliance and scrolling on tiny screens for the overwhelming majority of people. They have been taught, are being taught, not to question anything. The line between entertainment and lived reality is now so blurry it is all but invisible.
The only thing that might smack em round the head is an electrical grid falling over but for now such a thing seems a remote possibility.
Que, sera, sera

 

[ViniB]

For what its worth I have the feeling that most of the historical record as we probably all have been taught it when young, is invented. Certainly from years of reading academic papers especially going backwards to seek out the papers upon which the one I have just read is based on, they do love citing references to their peers and predecessors do academics, the trail always collapses down to an opinion put forward by someone about some document most often that I cannot track down in digital form.
Finding out which institution holds an accessible paper version is a job in itself and often its an academic institution which doesn't allow Joe public to read their material.

There is no appetite amongst researchers outside of academia, nor for that matter within, to invent, test and establish a methodology that is able to establish a likelihood of veracity based on the evidence available which is flexible enough to be updateable when new evidence comes to light.
I'm not even sure such a method could be developed.

Well, as far as i'm aware Fomenko and Novovsky team are the only ones currently working on such method, and according to Fomenko himself there's been colaboration from people all over the world via his website

For oddbals like me who know something is wrong but cannot put a handle on it, so I scrabble around looking at details of what is actually there and try my level best to avoid falling into the belief trap, as alluring as it is, it becomes very frustrating to the point where I have to stop and look at things from a new angle.

Imo this is the gold standard for independent research, as though as it is

Its why I feel quite sure most of the historical record is invented as in not in the least bit accurate as a record of the passing of events. There is no methodology for checking veracity so the inventors have free rein to come up with whatever belief or opinion they invent and push it in whatever way they can. Some of it gets traction some of it doesn't. Personalities come and go throughout the historical industry if I may put it that way and the dogs breakfast endures.

As of late, imo, this notion of perpetual collapse of civilizations is the best tool to keep the hoax going, so when we look at our current civilization going down the sewer the 90% of NPCs be like 'oh it's a cycle of growth and colapse, nothing to do about it'. Some of my friends are questioning in those lines as well, and if the NPCs did the same, next week most world leaders would literally loose their heads

I doubt there is anyone alive who knows the accuracy of any event that occurs during their lifetime that they did not experience personally. With every telling and retelling things change sometimes subtly sometimes markedly but we alive today have "the internet" and so can see events in "real time" so we are clued up right.

I forgot the person's name but he used the term perpetual propagandawhen it comes to any form of news, coudn't be more accurate

The only thing that might smack em round the head is an electrical grid falling over but for now such a thing seems a remote possibility.
Que, sera, sera

Tbh, i don't think it's that far due to this worldwide push for censorship, because how dare we the cattle have a mind of our own instead of the borg. It's part of the agenda total information control, one way or another

 

[Jd755]

Well, as far as i'm aware Fomenko and Novovsky team are the only ones currently working on such method, and according to Fomenko himself there's been colaboration from people all over the world via his websit

They are mathematicians working on statistical analysis best I can see. Fair does they are at least doing something towards establishing a different and hopefully more accurate chronology. I'm not hopeful though as they believe the earth rotates and rotates around the sun and planets are something more than lights over our heads. I struggle to get into the reading required to get on their page if you will.
But that's just me. Silveryou aka deleted member 37 has been reading Fomenko for thirteen years or so maybe he's got further.

next week most world leaders would literally loose their heads

Again best I can tell "world leaders" are just actors. String pullers remain anonymous or as Anastasia calls them "image makers"

Tbh, i don't think it's that far due to this worldwide push for censorship, because how dare we the cattle have a mind of our own instead of the borg. It's part of the agenda total information control, one way or another

Electricity grids are shaky things that always teeter on the brink of failure. Electricity in electricity out is what they are. Thing is once one goes down totally it stays down. It cannot be brought back up. This is why there are filing power cuts, outages to use an Americanism. Planned and controlled to a large extent, weather not withstanding, the way the grid failure is kept at bay.

 

[Udjat]

those born in this century are trained constantly from very young to trust what our eyes see and our ears hear contained within the internet.

Tried the college thing when I was in my twenties, didn't finish, had credits lingering around. Decided to just go back to school so I can finish up for a degree. In going back I am in knee deep of indoctrination first hand, and it is so deep that I can't believe it. Most of the kids in the classes are young and I feel old, but I can't believe what they dish out at schools these days. Wow!!! No one really cares though because they are too busy with their phones, just like everyone else. It is a real shame to see how depressed and disconnected many souls are, and how many souls are willing to obey.

 

[ViniB]

They are mathematicians working on statistical analysis best I can see. Fair does they are at least doing something towards establishing a different and hopefully more accurate chronology. I'm not hopeful though as they believe the earth rotates and rotates around the sun and planets are something more than lights over our heads. I struggle to get into the reading required to get on their page if you will.

It's the best we have at the moment,and i get your suspicion about his planetary belief. I have some hope because since "history" is the foundation of modern society, when it's proven to be a lie, the house of cards can collapse to a large degree

Again best I can tell "world leaders" are just actors. String pullers remain anonymous or as Anastasia calls them "image makers"

I don't dispute that, but still it would be nice to see the actors go down. At this point, i'm not even sure the string pullers are human

Electricity grids are shaky things that always teeter on the brink of failure. Electricity in electricity out is what they are. Thing is once one goes down totally it stays down. It cannot be brought back up. This is why there are filing power cuts, outages to use an Americanism. Planned and controlled to a large extent, weather not withstanding, the way the grid failure is kept at bay.

As someone who deals constantly with oscilations, i understand. A little extra wind or rain and it goes out

 

[Jd755]

The planetary nonsense is based on vision, recording of things seen by eye, the lack of attention to our optical geometry. Its used by many theorists as a fall back position if you will seemingly brought into the mix when their theory begins to falter. The beauty of planetary theory is it can never be tested.

Truth is when you realise and crucially accept our optical geometry distorts the physical reality planets become what they are lights visible at night above our head just the same as the other luminaries. They all move save one. The pole star is the sole stationary light.
To my mind wherever the location is on land or water where you and I can stand directly underneath it is most likely to be the site where questions of what here is may well be answered.

Fomenko and crew may well be bang on. I am not equippied with the tools nor attention needed to realise and test their theories out.

Tried the college thing when I was in my twenties, didn't finish, had credits lingering around. Decided to just go back to school so I can finish up for a degree. In going back I am in knee deep of indoctrination first hand, and it is so deep that I can't believe it. Most of the kids in the classes are young and I feel old, but I can't believe what they dish out at schools these days. Wow!!! No one really cares though because they are too busy with their phones, just like everyone else. It is a real shame to see how depressed and disconnected many souls are, and how many souls are willing to obey.

All I do is leave them be, which is really hard at times to be honest. I've tried to get some to just consider things differently but outside of my sons its just not possible. The need to fit in, comply, obey, be something by not being anything is overriding.

 

[Deleted member 1432]

I decided to abandon this forum some two years ago in order to set up my own website. This was due to the hostile environment that had developed in the forum. The only things that flourish in a hostile environment are all negative.

About a year ago I revisited the forum and later decided to participate once again. However, this was not due to a change in its environment, but in response to the apparent Christian Crusade that was underway and the lack of resistance to all the Evangelism. Both my brother, Felix Noille, and I have been involved with the stolenhistory forums, in one form or another, for about 5 years now and in spite of all the aggravation, we would not want to see it lost forever.

I find it very difficult to understand the attitude expressed by some that on the one hand “we have been lied to” and either everything is fake/manipulated/edited/censored, whilst on the other hand insisting that all research must be based upon “facts.” The one precludes the other. It’s for this very reason that there can be no clinical scientific methodology for the reinvestigation of ‘history’. There are no “facts.” This is exactly why those who claim that “it’s all fake” also claim to know the “truth” of everything and do not hesitate to use it in order to demolish all contrary arguments – which is really Nihilism, not research.

The only material we have to work with is all tainted and unreliable. It’s at best a remotely echoed opinions, or interpretations, of an event or artefact all of which come down to us without the frame of reference within which they were created. Even many of these materials were deliberately intended to mislead and confuse. Therefore, any assumptions we wish to make based upon this material can only ever be speculation, but ‘speculation’ has become a dirty insulting word in this forum.

This situation also lends itself to the reinterpretation of history as part of an agenda to reinforce, redefine, or introduce, a specific ideology. After all, that is precisely the nature of the available ‘historic’ material, which is the basis of all our current ideologies. What’s more, a new frame of reference can easily be created through which to reinterpret everything from religious texts to depressions and marks in the ground.

The problem that inevitably arises is how do we evaluate any new proposal as to the nature of our history? How can we tell if what’s being presented is merely a collection of ‘bald opinions’ from second or third hand sources, a cut-and-paste from ChatGTP, the basis for a hidden agenda, or something worthy of consideration?

I can’t really answer that question as it’s highly subjective on a personal level. I rely a great deal on the presentation. If I’m being told something rather than being asked to consider it then it’s in my nature to be highly suspicious of it and even reject it altogether. It’s for this reason that I was dishonourably discharged from the Sea Cadets as a teenager.

We all have our own pet ideas regarding the past, some which may have been imposed through indoctrination, others through careful consideration and experience. Whether a new idea resonates with any individual will depend a great deal upon how it challenges their preconceptions. This is often evidenced by the ‘Angry’ face amongst all the ‘Likes’.

Which brings me to another point, or maybe rather back to the beginning of this comment. It is very difficult to deal with the emotional responses of both those whose beliefs have been offended and those whose ideas and theories are being attacked. Once again this is really a personal responsibility and comes down to that old fashioned concept of ‘good manners’ and etiquette on behalf of all members – not just those who have dared to present a new idea -but also those who disagree with it. I am the prime example of how not to behave when you are attacked because, eventually, I always bite back… politely. This was another reason for my withdrawal from the forum and is responsible for the deletion of many of my comments even now.

Unfortunately, good manners and etiquette are no longer valued in modern society where the opposite is true and those principles have sadly gone the way of respect and empathy. It’s unreasonable to expect that such values can be resurrected in this forum through administrative enforcement, but hopefully such infringements as manage to come to its attention will continue to be punished along with the removal of my inappropriate responses.

What more can we hope for? (That is a serious question.)

 

[feralimal]

For what its worth I have the feeling that most of the historical record as we probably all have been taught it when young, is invented. Certainly from years of reading academic papers especially going backwards to seek out the papers upon which the one I have just read is based on, they do love citing references to their peers and predecessors do academics, the trail always collapses down to an opinion put forward by someone about some document most often that I cannot track down in digital form.
Finding out which institution holds an accessible paper version is a job in itself and often its an academic institution which doesn't allow Joe public to read their material.

There is no appetite amongst researchers outside of academia, nor for that matter within, to invent, test and establish a methodology that is able to establish a likelihood of veracity based on the evidence available which is flexible enough to be updateable when new evidence comes to light.
I'm not even sure such a method could be developed.

That leaves an open field that gets filled with opinion and speculation based on opinion aka the dogs breakfast we have today.
This is an ideal place to implant an invented history to create an impression of being the correct history and for the vast majority of people that's perfectly okay as they have little or no interest in history and even less in the accuracy of history.

For oddbals like me who know something is wrong but cannot put a handle on it, so I scrabble around looking at details of what is actually there and try my level best to avoid falling into the belief trap, as alluring as it is, it becomes very frustrating to the point where I have to stop and look at things from a new angle.

Its why I feel quite sure most of the historical record is invented as in not in the least bit accurate as a record of the passing of events. There is no methodology for checking veracity so the inventors have free rein to come up with whatever belief or opinion they invent and push it in whatever way they can. Some of it gets traction some of it doesn't. Personalities come and go throughout the historical industry if I may put it that way and the dogs breakfast endures.

I doubt there is anyone alive who knows the accuracy of any event that occurs during their lifetime that they did not experience personally. With every telling and retelling things change sometimes subtly sometimes markedly but we alive today have "the internet" and so can see events in "real time" so we are clued up right.

It doesn't take much effort to discover that video, the primary product consumed by the masses, is a literal piece of piss to make an event look real but its just code running in a machine. It takes a bit more effort to learn to recognise machine writing in digital and print form but its doable. But those born in this century are trained constantly from very young to trust what our eyes see and our ears hear contained within the internet. We are also taught to graze and repeat what we see and hear never encouraged to go into the detail always instead to rely on the big picture being presented to the point where we defend things we actually know nothing about.
In my youth it was printed articles and television today its internet.

Effort these days amounts to compliance and scrolling on tiny screens for the overwhelming majority of people. They have been taught, are being taught, not to question anything. The line between entertainment and lived reality is now so blurry it is all but invisible.
The only thing that might smack em round the head is an electrical grid falling over but for now such a thing seems a remote possibility.
Que, sera, sera

Sounds like a great summary of my own position.

I decided to abandon this forum some two years ago in order to set up my own website. This was due to the hostile environment that had developed in the forum. The only things that flourish in a hostile environment are all negative.

About a year ago I revisited the forum and later decided to participate once again. However, this was not due to a change in its environment, but in response to the apparent Christian Crusade that was underway and the lack of resistance to all the Evangelism. Both my brother, Felix Noille, and I have been involved with the stolenhistory forums, in one form or another, for about 5 years now and in spite of all the aggravation, we would not want to see it lost forever.

I find it very difficult to understand the attitude expressed by some that on the one hand “we have been lied to” and either everything is fake/manipulated/edited/censored, whilst on the other hand insisting that all research must be based upon “facts.” The one precludes the other. It’s for this very reason that there can be no clinical scientific methodology for the reinvestigation of ‘history’. There are no “facts.” This is exactly why those who claim that “it’s all fake” also claim to know the “truth” of everything and do not hesitate to use it in order to demolish all contrary arguments – which is really Nihilism, not research.

The only material we have to work with is all tainted and unreliable. It’s at best a remotely echoed opinions, or interpretations, of an event or artefact all of which come down to us without the frame of reference within which they were created. Even many of these materials were deliberately intended to mislead and confuse. Therefore, any assumptions we wish to make based upon this material can only ever be speculation, but ‘speculation’ has become a dirty insulting word in this forum.

This situation also lends itself to the reinterpretation of history as part of an agenda to reinforce, redefine, or introduce, a specific ideology. After all, that is precisely the nature of the available ‘historic’ material, which is the basis of all our current ideologies. What’s more, a new frame of reference can easily be created through which to reinterpret everything from religious texts to depressions and marks in the ground.

The problem that inevitably arises is how do we evaluate any new proposal as to the nature of our history? How can we tell if what’s being presented is merely a collection of ‘bald opinions’ from second or third hand sources, a cut-and-paste from ChatGTP, the basis for a hidden agenda, or something worthy of consideration?

I can’t really answer that question as it’s highly subjective on a personal level. I rely a great deal on the presentation. If I’m being told something rather than being asked to consider it then it’s in my nature to be highly suspicious of it and even reject it altogether. It’s for this reason that I was dishonourably discharged from the Sea Cadets as a teenager.

We all have our own pet ideas regarding the past, some which may have been imposed through indoctrination, others through careful consideration and experience. Whether a new idea resonates with any individual will depend a great deal upon how it challenges their preconceptions. This is often evidenced by the ‘Angry’ face amongst all the ‘Likes’.

Which brings me to another point, or maybe rather back to the beginning of this comment. It is very difficult to deal with the emotional responses of both those whose beliefs have been offended and those whose ideas and theories are being attacked. Once again this is really a personal responsibility and comes down to that old fashioned concept of ‘good manners’ and etiquette on behalf of all members – not just those who have dared to present a new idea -but also those who disagree with it. I am the prime example of how not to behave when you are attacked because, eventually, I always bite back… politely. This was another reason for my withdrawal from the forum and is responsible for the deletion of many of my comments even now.

Unfortunately, good manners and etiquette are no longer valued in modern society where the opposite is true and those principles have sadly gone the way of respect and empathy. It’s unreasonable to expect that such values can be resurrected in this forum through administrative enforcement, but hopefully such infringements as manage to come to its attention will continue to be punished along with the removal of my inappropriate responses.

What more can we hope for? (That is a serious question.)

Also a great post!

Which brings me to another point, or maybe rather back to the beginning of this comment. It is very difficult to deal with the emotional responses of both those whose beliefs have been offended and those whose ideas and theories are being attacked. Once again this is really a personal responsibility and comes down to that old fashioned concept of ‘good manners’ and etiquette on behalf of all members – not just those who have dared to present a new idea -but also those who disagree with it. I am the prime example of how not to behave when you are attacked because, eventually, I always bite back… politely. This was another reason for my withdrawal from the forum and is responsible for the deletion of many of my comments even now.

If you come to a forum, and make a public statement I think its fair to receive polite pushback. We're all trying to learn, I think - and disagreement is how this happens! This quote is relevant, I think:

When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest - Anonymous

Its surely fine to be wrong - a blessing really. I don't understand the emotion involved - exploring differences is where all the interest in life is.

To me, the general malaise is on account of the points both Will and JD make. What would a valid history look like? As Will said:

The problem that inevitably arises is how do we evaluate any new proposal as to the nature of our history? How can we tell if what’s being presented is merely a collection of ‘bald opinions’ from second or third hand sources, a cut-and-paste from ChatGTP, the basis for a hidden agenda, or something worthy of consideration?

For me, this is an impossible question to answer. We can see how history is a/ written by the victors and then b/ re-drafted ad infinitum. Its like trying to work out how the grains of rice were stacked in the packet from the way they landed in the pot - ie its impossible!

At that point, when one realises there are no stories ready to replace the comforting, authenticated MSM story - a lot of people will lose interest. They want that comforting story! Even if its not there! So their search continues.. aliens, tartarians, etc.

This is not to say however that the task of looking is valueless. I ask - what present value is there in promoting this or that story? How was this story seeded? Was it planted naturally, or was it intended for that effect? How is the ship steered? How can the individual avoid being steered? I think by researching history, we can learn a lot, it can help us focus on what's really important in the present rather than becoming distracted by the provided shows.

 

[ViniB]

What more can we hope for? (That is a serious question.)

This is such a fundamental question that i don't feel qualified to try an answer tbh, but me thinks that a research without ego or bias is the best way foward, after all we're in this mess called reality together, and ego fights will do nothing but harm to the quality of the forum and we will be no better than the "historians" we rightfuly criticize

At that point, when one realises there are no stories ready to replace the comforting, authenticated MSM story - a lot of people will lose interest. They want that comforting story!

I see much of this in the current debates between msterialists and new agers when it comes to philosophy of science, in which the new agers are like only mind exists and the secrets of existance will be revealed when we die and the materialists be like only matter exists and everything is a byproduct of it, and both attack each other with no productive end result

 

[Sudevi]

This is such a fundamental question that i don't feel qualified to try an answer tbh, but me thinks that a research without ego or bias is the best way foward, after all we're in this mess called reality together, and ego fights will do nothing but harm to the quality of the forum and we will be no better than the "historians" we rightfuly criticize

I see much of this in the current debates between msterialists and new agers when it comes to philosophy of science, in which the new agers are like only mind exists and the secrets of existance will be revealed when we die and the materialists be like only matter exists and everything is a byproduct of it, and both attack each other with no productive end result

As someone who has been lurking here for awhile, I feel I should make a response.

Reading your entries on this site has been (still ongoing!) an amazing education for me. Not so much in what to believe or not. But in how you question, how you research what interests you, how you present your findings and thoughts, and how you share the way you think about your research. I've learned so much about how and what to question in my own life from reading all of you. I sincerely hope that you don't lose heart and stop. I can't possibly be the only lurker (may I prefer "reader" instead?) who feels this way. Truly, what you write here is fascinating.

I haven't posted before because most of the research I've been doing in my own life has to do with things that aren't topics here (cults, traumatic narcissist cult leaders and their relational systems, etc., etc). Although I will surprise you (and myself!) one day.

 

[Just]

As someone who has been lurking here for awhile, I feel I should make a response.

Reading your entries on this site has been (still ongoing!) an amazing education for me. Not so much in what to believe or not. But in how you question, how you research what interests you, how you present your findings and thoughts, and how you share the way you think about your research. I've learned so much about how and what to question in my own life from reading all of you. I sincerely hope that you don't lose heart and stop. I can't possibly be the only lurker (may I prefer "reader" instead?) who feels this way. Truly, what you write here is fascinating.

I haven't posted before because most of the research I've been doing in my own life has to do with things that aren't topics here (cults, traumatic narcissist cult leaders and their relational systems, etc., etc). Although I will surprise you (and myself!) one day.

This sounds fascinating- please post what you know! I recently heard that following a poll it was discovered that young people in the US / UK would prefer a dictator to democracy. Of course the poll may well be deliberate lies to put the thought in our heads but a discussion on cult leaders would be very timely. Jim Jones and the CIA involvement would be an interesting topic to explore too.

 

[CL Cromer]

I don’t qualify as a researcher and was never that type of student in school. I definitely don’t classify my interjections as being scholarly, but i genuinely enjoy being helpful to others and have a daily growing skill set. My brief thoughts expressed on this site are for the gamblers so please place your alpha bets..

I have mentally collected bits of information, and data like a squirrel collecting nuts. Sometimes eating a tasty oak blueprint , jumping from branch to branch like the flying Wallendas, swaying in the lofty tree tops of thought, and sometimes collecting the rogue acorn from asphalt hell and becoming flattented mental roadkill. Most often though, I am placing hundreds if not thousands of mental acorn bets and I’m playing the odds. sometimes there are some duds out there and it can be a mind mine field, I have no clue which one will hit and then KaBoom, I have unearthed an acorn. Hopefully this is a good one.

If you are what you eat, then I contend that you are what you think. If history is stolen, then you are a victim of theft.

To the Squirrel, the oak is Equal parts home, playground and nourishment. It’s a good life. Now if that tree gets cut down for lumber or fire wood, blown over by an intense storm, Infested with bugs, struck by the lighting gods, or smashed into by a rogue Tesla with buggy autopilot, the squirrels home could easily become stolen from it, but I don’t think the squirrel lingers too long, they have a pretty short life span and they gotta keep it moving.

I am thankful for those who tirelessly research and use their brilliant minds to compose painstakingly researched information and challenge beliefs. Your offerings are like the solid oak tree for me. Hopefully we don’t linger too long on the dud acorns. History may have been stolen, but don’t be robbed of your pre-sent story. Now is the time of great thought, action and innovation. I will be planting trees, and thank all of you who do the same.

 

[Just]

I don’t qualify as a researcher and was never that type of student in school. I definitely don’t classify my interjections as being scholarly, but i genuinely enjoy being helpful to others and have a daily growing skill set. My brief thoughts expressed on this site are for the gamblers so please place your alpha bets..

I have mentally collected bits of information, and data like a squirrel collecting nuts. Sometimes eating a tasty oak blueprint , jumping from branch to branch like the flying Wallendas, swaying in the lofty tree tops of thought, and sometimes collecting the rogue acorn from asphalt hell and becoming flattented mental roadkill. Most often though, I am placing hundreds if not thousands of mental acorn bets and I’m playing the odds. sometimes there are some duds out there and it can be a mind mine field, I have no clue which one will hit and then KaBoom, I have unearthed an acorn. Hopefully this is a good one.

If you are what you eat, then I contend that you are what you think. If history is stolen, then you are a victim of theft.

To the Squirrel, the oak is Equal parts home, playground and nourishment. It’s a good life. Now if that tree gets cut down for lumber or fire wood, blown over by an intense storm, Infested with bugs, struck by the lighting gods, or smashed into by a rogue Tesla with buggy autopilot, the squirrels home could easily become stolen from it, but I don’t think the squirrel lingers too long, they have a pretty short life span and they gotta keep it moving.

I am thankful for those who tirelessly research and use their brilliant minds to compose painstakingly researched information and challenge beliefs. Your offerings are like the solid oak tree for me. Hopefully we don’t linger too long on the dud acorns. History may have been stolen, but don’t be robbed of your pre-sent story. Now is the time of great thought, action and innovation. I will be planting trees, and thank all of you who do the same.

I love your use of language here and it sparked two recent thoughts I had concerning the manipulation of words we have been deceived with: ‘mind’ and ‘mined’: they have strip-mined our brains so that we’re unable to adequately process the extent to which we’ve been lied to. The other is ‘found’ and ‘founded’. This building / company / institution was founded in 1850 for example. What they mean is ‘we found it and repurposed it for our own ends’. Any more examples?

 

[Jd755]

I used to feel everything historical is fake. My research most of which I don't post in here or at the other place nor write down, has taken me in that direction. Over time I developed a feeling, scratch that, a knowing that those who deign to rule do so by controlling the past. In short history is the very root, or perhaps better, bedrock of their claim to rule by authority.
No-one votes for them or appoints them let alone have any other form of "say" what these people can and cannot do. They just endure. Some call them families some elites makes no odds. Most people alive at any one time have no clue about what is really going on me included.
Its a little club and we ain't in it, if I may put it that way.

The historical past is mostly invented to my mind to create this apparent control of the past.. There are like as not many truths within the invention that seems more than plausible but the whole truth and nothing but the truth is on every level a personal thing.
By inventing believable events and people and building a history upon them whilst downplaying truth or simply ignoringn them is all that's needed to hide them away even from mutters like us who know something is wrong and go actively searching and sifting to find out what.

The issue I have not found a definitive answer to is how do I discern truth from invention?
What are the signs and signals to look out for?
Where is a repeatable methodology coming from?
Best I have got as is obvious to anyone reading this thread is logistics of events and claims made for individuals, groups and so on. The investigation of the claims using known parameters which arise from living life as we know it is another way of putting it.
Its better than no method but by how much who knows?

Its blindingly obvious there is no way yo date the creation of physical artifacts and yet archaeology, academia and researchers do it all the time. Their methodology is never mentioned so a bust of a bald man gets given a name and a date to place it in the accepted chronological order without anyone explaining how they arrived at these conclusions. They are accepted and parroted without scrutiny.

There are pictures on here of "terrorists smashing ancient sculptures to pieces" so ancient they are made of concrete and plaster and have steel reinforcing rods clearly visible. Yet how does the obvious fakery get out into the wider world?
I don't think it can nowadays when the wider world views their world through the internet which in itself is consumed through tiny screens.

Not really that much different to the days when television was the informing god and papers/magazines did the same job before them. Does that mean history as we lewrnt it was invented more or less when the printing press and movable type came into being?

 

[Just]

I used to feel everything historical is fake. My research most of which I don't post in here or at the other place nor write down, has taken me in that direction. Over time I developed a feeling, scratch that, a knowing that those who deign to rule do so by controlling the past. In short history is the very root, or perhaps better, bedrock of their claim to rule by authority.
No-one votes for them or appoints them let alone have any other form of "say" what these people can and cannot do. They just endure. Some call them families some elites makes no odds. Most people alive at any one time have no clue about what is really going on me included.
Its a little club and we ain't in it, if I may put it that way.

The historical past is mostly invented to my mind to create this apparent control of the past.. There are like as not many truths within the invention that seems more than plausible but the whole truth and nothing but the truth is on every level a personal thing.
By inventing believable events and people and building a history upon them whilst downplaying truth or simply ignoringn them is all that's needed to hide them away even from mutters like us who know something is wrong and go actively searching and sifting to find out what.

The issue I have not found a definitive answer to is how do I discern truth from invention?
What are the signs and signals to look out for?
Where is a repeatable methodology coming from?
Best I have got as is obvious to anyone reading this thread is logistics of events and claims made for individuals, groups and so on. The investigation of the claims using known parameters which arise from living life as we know it is another way of putting it.
Its better than no method but by how much who knows?

Its blindingly obvious there is no way yo date the creation of physical artifacts and yet archaeology, academia and researchers do it all the time. Their methodology is never mentioned so a bust of a bald man gets given a name and a date to place it in the accepted chronological order without anyone explaining how they arrived at these conclusions. They are accepted and parroted without scrutiny.

There are pictures on here of "terrorists smashing ancient sculptures to pieces" so ancient they are made of concrete and plaster and have steel reinforcing rods clearly visible. Yet how does the obvious fakery get out into the wider world?
I don't think it can nowadays when the wider world views their world through the internet which in itself is consumed through tiny screens.

Not really that much different to the days when television was the informing god and papers/magazines did the same job before them. Does that mean history as we lewrnt it was invented more or less when the printing press and movable type came into being?

The very pertinent question about how we discern truth from invention is at the heart of everything discussed on this site and, for me, is the most vexing part of the discovery that so much is faked. Why do I find it a lot easier to believe what I read here and very little of what I read or see on MSM? Maybe the problem is ‘belief’ with the ‘lie’ at the heart of it. Maybe all we need to do is question and to hold that thought until the possibility of some truth begins to emerge. Balance the two sides of an argument and feel which one holds more compelling evidence. When it comes to what people say, I have found ‘statement analysis’ a very useful tool and it makes you really listen to the exact words people are using which often gives clues to what they’re really thinking. The only issue with it is that it doesn’t work for scripted speech and possibly not for psychopaths - no use for politicians then.

I used to feel everything historical is fake. My research most of which I don't post in here or at the other place nor write down, has taken me in that direction. Over time I developed a feeling, scratch that, a knowing that those who deign to rule do so by controlling the past. In short history is the very root, or perhaps better, bedrock of their claim to rule by authority.
No-one votes for them or appoints them let alone have any other form of "say" what these people can and cannot do. They just endure. Some call them families some elites makes no odds. Most people alive at any one time have no clue about what is really going on me included.
Its a little club and we ain't in it, if I may put it that way.

The historical past is mostly invented to my mind to create this apparent control of the past.. There are like as not many truths within the invention that seems more than plausible but the whole truth and nothing but the truth is on every level a personal thing.
By inventing believable events and people and building a history upon them whilst downplaying truth or simply ignoringn them is all that's needed to hide them away even from mutters like us who know something is wrong and go actively searching and sifting to find out what.

The issue I have not found a definitive answer to is how do I discern truth from invention?
What are the signs and signals to look out for?
Where is a repeatable methodology coming from?
Best I have got as is obvious to anyone reading this thread is logistics of events and claims made for individuals, groups and so on. The investigation of the claims using known parameters which arise from living life as we know it is another way of putting it.
Its better than no method but by how much who knows?

Its blindingly obvious there is no way yo date the creation of physical artifacts and yet archaeology, academia and researchers do it all the time. Their methodology is never mentioned so a bust of a bald man gets given a name and a date to place it in the accepted chronological order without anyone explaining how they arrived at these conclusions. They are accepted and parroted without scrutiny.

There are pictures on here of "terrorists smashing ancient sculptures to pieces" so ancient they are made of concrete and plaster and have steel reinforcing rods clearly visible. Yet how does the obvious fakery get out into the wider world?
I don't think it can nowadays when the wider world views their world through the internet which in itself is consumed through tiny screens.

Not really that much different to the days when television was the informing god and papers/magazines did the same job before them. Does that mean history as we lewrnt it was invented more or less when the printing press and movable type came into being?

My comment above was meant to reply

 

[feralimal]

This is a bit of a meandering comment! But I hope it is accepted as relevant to this thread.

It struck me once again earlier today, that when it comes to "human achievements" what I think has actually been achieved is something quite counter-intuitive. The common expression is something like: "there have been countless technological advances in recent years and the speed is accelerating". But I think this is wrong. I want to push back and say not very many meaningful changes have occurred at all, and that those we see are in one specific area only.

So, if we consider - what technological advances have occurred in living memory? Taking a broad selection of areas: transport, buildings, medical advances, technology.

Thinking about transport - has this improved or got worse in your lifetime? Are cars better? Are buses, trains or planes? Yes we have better frills and tassels - usb charging, electric this or that, bluetooth connectivity. But the core experience is the same. In fact, I can make an argument for it being worse - there is far more nannying, warning lights all over the dashboard, etc - but overall I'd say transportation has not advanced in any meaningful way in the last, 40 to 60 years, compared to the previous 'horse to vehicle' jump. Is a Tesla really that much better? Electric buses?

Has housing improved? It has certainly become way more expensive - but is it better? Perhaps there are better heating systems, better windows and insulation. But on the other hand, modern buildings are generally so poorly made - with walls you can run through. Again I'd say any progress is neutral.

Has health improved on account of medical advances? In general I think there is a case that people's health is worse than in earlier years, even if we are told that people live for longer. There is more 'toy food' and less real food being consumed. I think there are more interventions, more medicalising of people, treatment to keep folk limping along. Yes we hear an awful lot about this or that wonder drug... that never materialises!

Ok - so if we consider technology now, surely we can see a huge improvement? And here I would agree - no one has seen a black and white tv or VCR in 20 years! We have mobile phones, the internet, laptops, streaming music and videos, infinite information, games. There is in my mind no doubt that technology has progressed. This is where all the growth has happened!

However, although I say "technology", I think it would be better to say "information" or "content". Basically media and delivery of that content is what has had off-the-chart growth. I also like the term "Information Technology" - this seems closer to my meaning.

[I don't want to veer off too far, but I note the following linguistics points: information = in formation, content = content (like happy), media = as in 'mediate' or be in the middle.]

So, yes - information technology has improved vastly in the recent decades - technology to keep us in-formation. I would go even further and say that this has always been the game - information as a tool of control. Delivery of that information like news, radio, screens are just the more recent iterations - in older times history and religion would provide the context of our reality.

I would also say that it doesn't matter what the subject matter even is - that the important thing has always been to get people in to a formation. Anything that has collectivising power - Jesus, conspiracies, social justice, science, sportsball - is great - the more it engages, the better! The formation of the herd is the point.

I think individuals have been perpetually subjected to a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. I'm borrowing this term from technology:

In cryptography and computer security, a man-in-the-middle[a] (MITM) attack is a cyberattack where the attacker secretly relays and possibly alters the communications between two parties who believe that they are directly communicating with each other, as the attacker has inserted themselves between the two parties.[9]

Man-in-the-middle attack - Wikipedia

We interact with the world via the technology we are provided. We are told something happens and then that event is mediated for us. Mostly we interact with the world via screens and most people are not discerning about what they are shown - it is natural to assume that the presentation is real. But there are many reasons to think it is not as portrayed. Were the flights into space real? Is science more real that religion - or are both just about manipulating the perception of reality? Has our sense data stream been intercepted? Is it that as we transition to an even more power datastream provider, that those of us paying attention have a moment to see how the trick is pulled? And - to bring this back on point to this thread - what of history? Have stories ever been of actual benefit to the individual, or is information only even been an attempt to collectivise? So, are all stories, recent and old, a MITM attack?

In my view, power comes from the collectivising of individuals to get them into a form that can then be directed. Once the direction is established, the momentum is powerful - the mass change results in mass opportunities! The challenge for some is to harness that power for their benefit. Perhaps that's the challenge for most!

Actual progress in wider reality is not where its at. The perception and presentation of "progress" is. On the stage where narratives are played out, the main element is the story you are engaging with. The whole stage, story, characters are now provided by Information Technology. The provided appearance of reality has had quite the upgrade in recent years!

One key element is the backdrop - this is history. As on a traditional stage, you can change the backdrop for a play. You might prefer a cityscape, or perhaps you prefer a mountain scene - it simply has to be convincing enough to allow you to accept the story being played out. A feature of a backdrop is that is can't change too quickly, eg during a scene, or it spoils the story. However, with Information Technology it is possible to change a backdrop immediately. This isn't done though because the audience won't like it. However, the pace of the (subtle) scenery changes has surely picked up in recent years as backdrops are updated with far greater frequency - there are so many narratives, there is even contention for the backdrop (history).

I'm saying that history was only ever a convenient backdrop. The old reality presentation did not allow for a quick seamless change - it was easy to assume that it was static, real. But having upgraded to a better reality presentation platform (Information Technology) the fact that historical narratives have shifted so much (to serve present purposes) mean that we have a chance to spot this! Great! We can say that the backdrops are false.

This is what I think is being discussed in this thread - we are now up to speed with all that... that we recognise backdrops aren't what they were. We are struggling because if you were one for studying backdrops (a historian), you now realise that it was only ever a fake thing, expedient for its time, a helper to develop the present. We (on this site) are perhaps overly attached to the idea of the static backdrop.

Where I go then, is I am lead by the question(s) - what is meaningful? Where is the solid ground in history? Or anywhere?