September 22, 2018

Rotten, Filthy Social Media Expanding Its Cancerous Grip

Mainstream Media has muddled along for centuries calmly and without much real opposition to their canned lies and misinformation, until lately, all designed to manipulate public opinion and thought. While the overwhelming majority of Americans will mouth that Media cannot be trusted and that they lie, they obviously do not believe that because, like an addict, they run to them and put on their feed bags. They just can’t help it.

I’ve been at this blogging stuff for many years. When I first began, Mainstream Media, went out of their way to discredit anyone who offered anything that they didn’t control. Evidently, some, anyway, saw Alternative Media as a threat. They fought against it and then joined the circus attempting to take it over and control it.

Certainly, Alternative Media has had an influence on mass media and in particular newsprint. News websites are still trying to find ways to force readers to pay for their misinformation and lies. In short, they are struggling and it will only get worse with each passing generation.

Then Social Media happened. A well-planned and design-specific tool that would cause immediate, widespread and long-lasting societal destruction. In no time at all, millions became addicted. They found a place where they could be anything they wanted to be. They could hate, send a message, laugh, hate some more, be rude, be filthy, be disgusting, threaten people, wish them dead, you name it. It’s all bad and I mean ALL BAD!

That addiction soon put my efforts as an independent writer/blogger in jeopardy. Because the designers of Social Media knew that the programmed automatons couldn’t stay focused longer than 141 characters, well researched, precisely written and honest journalism was doomed…or at least well-controlled.

Whether you and I hate or are head over heels addicted to Social Media matters very little. It is what drives Americans today and there’s little any of us can do about it. I would suppose, to be nice, I should congratulate the designers of Social Media that they could come up with something so compellingly enslaving while at the same time grabbing control over and striking a crushing blow to truth, integrity, and common decency.

It appears that Social Media is having its effects on writers for Mainstream Media outlets. Here’s one example.

In Maine, a Warden Service plane, while attempting to land on a frozen lake in Northern Maine, went through the ice. A reporter for the Bangor Daily News reported on the event.

Yesterday another Bangor News reporter followed up the event with a piece of his own. In his report, it seems that his entire article is driven by his displeasure with Social Media and the comments made about how stupid it was that a government plane would disregard their own advice and attempt to land a plane on ice some deemed unsafe. He writes: “Before any details were made public on Wednesday, social media outlets were buzzing with opinions from those bold enough — or rude enough — to spew their opinions…” Throughout the article, the author refers to those participants in Social Media as, “armchair quarterbacks,” “finger-pointers who are yucking it up,” and “Joe Ice Fisher.”

Because the article was actually more about how and why outdoor recreationists should consider that even Wardens can make mistakes and that we should be absolutely certain it’s safe before venturing onto any ice to have some fun, it did not need to nasty with truthful comments directed at Social Media.

I’m not even going to pretend to preach about how journalists need to present themselves better and different than mere Social Mediaites because maybe they are not capable of rising above it. I’ll save that discussion for another time.

Regardless of your own perspective of Social Media, which I’m guessing is much like that of Mainstream Media – you say one thing and do another – it has its power, as is seen here. It, at its least, influences what columnists are writing. The sad part is, if you can see it, Social Media is worse than the most radical of malignant tumors. It is a reflection of what has become of a society that relies on pleasures and satisfaction rather than on the truth and decency of their Creator God. As it grows bigger, it becomes more powerful and eventually chokes off the life all around it until one day the entire body is choked off and dies.

Sad!

Share

Bill: Like Gun Ownership Requirements, Journalist Should be Scrutinized the Same Way 

Pitts told The Post and Courier his bill is not a reaction to any news story featuring him and that he is “not a press hater.” Rather, it’s to stimulate discussion over how he sees Second Amendment rights being treated by the printed press and television news. He added that the bill is modeled directly after the “concealed weapons permitting law.”

“It strikes me as ironic that the first question is constitutionality from a press that has no problem demonizing firearms,” Pitts said. “With this statement I’m talking primarily about printed press and TV. The TV stations, the six o’clock news and the printed press has no qualms demonizing gun owners and gun ownership.”

Source: Republican lawmaker says journalists should face a registry to work in South Carolina – Post and Courier

Share

Moose Are Dying – Intelligent, Responsible Journalism is Extinct

An article sent to me by a reader, epitomizes the disgusting, irresponsible, ignorant, embellishing journalism is using to further brainwash already brainwashed people, who have had independent thought bred out of them.

The headline begins the travesty by declaring that moose are “dying in droves” because of global warming. Combine this with a final hilarious statement that:

A study earlier this year predicts that up to 97% of birds and mammals living in the vast region of northwest Alaska will experience major habitat affects from climate change.

and you have all the makings of a “C”-rated sci-fi movie – done in black and white. It is utter nonsense to lay claims of moose mortality on global warming when, in fact, there no longer exists ANY scientific evidence that global warming has occurred. What data that has been given the public, has all proven to be manipulated, worthless information that only helps those, like Al Gore, looking to line their pockets.

In addition, ALL studies done on global warming in the past that made “predictions” directed at scaring the hell out of pseudo-journalists like the one inking this nonsense, proved to be, not only inaccurate, but so far off all credibility was lost except to the useful idiots who still choose to believe the sky is falling.

The Doomsday writer wants to utilize a “study” that “predicts” the world is coming to an end because it sells copies? How insane. Computer modeling has proven to be a waste of time, not so much that the computers can’t make predictions but because the information being fed into them is design to produce the results needed to generate income to continue fake studies. Doesn’t anybody get this?

What’s most sad about this kind of irresponsible reporting is, it does nothing to assist and educate with facts in order that real science can be conducted to find out about the relationships with moose and all things within its environment that effects survivability of the animal. Yelling and screaming that global warming is creating bugs and viruses that are killing moose in “droves,” is akin to yelling fire in a movie theater when someone lights a match.

Actual, normal science strongly indicates that changes in climate have existed since the beginning of recorded history, are cyclical, and seriously affected by the sun. There is no real science that proves or even strongly suggests that burning of fossil fuels and other causes of carbon dioxide generation is sending the earth into some kind of irreversible death spiral. Get over it!

More than likely, what we are seeing with moose is a cyclical event, fueled in part by cycles of localized weather patterns, over-protection of moose that causes too high a population, which prompts disease, over-protection of predators that create precipitous drops in prey specie numbers, and a host of other factors.

It is just plain irresponsible for this reporter or anybody else to embellish such utter nonsense. Isn’t it time to get back to real science for the good of all?

Share

Testing and Exposing Fake Science Articles

If what is going on with “journalism” and the need to prop up political ideologue and justify “results” for those funding fake science, is the norm, what’s to be said about the destruction of real academia and scientific research? Is this also a planned event?

At JunkScience, there’s an article that exposes where one man deliberately wrote a fake article. It was published, evidently without scrutiny, all to prove a point.

Sokal’s hoax served a public purpose, to attract attention to what Sokal saw as a decline of standards of rigor in the academic community, and for that reason it was unmasked immediately by the author himself.

Share

Legislation to Protect Concealed Carry Permit Holders

A Maine lawmaker has proposed legislation that would make it impossible for the public to obtain the personal information of those people holding a valid Maine concealed weapons permit. Some favor this and some don’t. As the article points out Maine is only one of fourteen states that still allows public access to this information. Such legislation is not new nor is there any new arguments for or against limiting the public to information of this kind.

This Maine legislation was prompted by the incident in New York where a news agency decided to publish the names and addresses of concealed weapons permit holders in two counties. The arguments for and against this ignorant and violence-baiting move were the same old tired ones. Permit holders declared the list would give crooks a list of where to go to steal guns and some of the non permit holders said it provided crooks a list of homes NOT to go rob because they did have guns and that, they said, made them more vulnerable because robbers would know that. What was NOT readily discussed was the intent of the people publishing the list.

So, why would anyone, coming on the heels of the Newtown, Ct. school shootings and following a few days of emotionally charged debate on the right to keep and bear arms, publish to the public, a list of names and addresses of people who hold a legal right to carry permit? Is it because they want to let criminals know where and where not to find concealed carry holders? Perhaps! Was it to alert crooks as to which houses may not have any guns, therefore making it easier to rob? Doubtful! Or was it a malicious act to provide a targeted address for anyone emotionally worked up over their hatred of guns and gun owners that they would know where to target someone who owned a gun? Absolutely! And that’s the crime that’s not being talked about here.

This is nothing new. Put on your thinking caps or climb aboard the Wayback Machine with Mr. Peabody and Sherman, to a time when this nation was having a great debate about Freedom of Information Access and what should and should not be included in information to be made available to the public and why. If you will recall many stated that there would be abuses and that there would be some who would use this private information for things other than just needing to know. Little did we know back then that news journalists would publish names and address of people they hoped would somehow at least be embarrassed and worse would become specific targets of deranged and hateful people that are no better than the drugged up person who supposedly murdered 26 people at Sandy Hook.

It is the actions of such selfish, non thinking, hateful, unethical, power abusive people that have caused states to formulate legislation in order to stop this. In my mind, there is no other legitimate reason for a person or persons to expose people in this fashion other than to cause them harm, possibly death.

I recall in New Jersey, people who care more about animals than humans, harassed hunters enough that legislation had to be adopted to prevent these mentally ill people from going into the woods and doing harm to the bear hunters.

In Idaho, a man who holds the distinct honor of legally shooting the first gray wolf, during a state sanctioned hunting season, had his name and that of many other licensed Idaho wolf hunters published in order that they would become targets of people wanting to do harm to them. The poor guy received more death threats for killing a wolf than if he had threatened to kill a human. Such sick behavior has prompted the Idaho Congress to pass a law making it illegal to publish this information.

So, you can choose to debate the ins and outs of why its right or wrong to publish personal information about licensed gun owners, but let’s not forget to include in that debate the fact that the real reason anybody would do that is to cause another person harm. And that is wrong and should be dealt with.

Share

Where Once A Man’s Word Had Honor, Now Lies Have Become Truth

The dictionary defines a progressive as being someone who “favors progress or reform, especially in political matters”. Progress and reform are both gray issues; meaning there is no specific description of what each means. That in and of itself presents an array of troublesome quandaries that have led this fine nation into a spiraling abyss of immorality, or at least can be perceived by anyone maintaining some semblance of an honest and ethical lifestyle. One such example of “favors progress or reform”, in order to achieve a desired result, is lying. Where once a man’s word retained a wealth of value and was as good as good can get, now lying is not only prevalent but eagerly accepted among the masses of progressive, secular Americans. But why?

One of the things I managed to accomplish this summer while at my camp in the woods of Maine was to read. One particular book I read – one that I bought for .50 cents at the library book sale – was another in a growing collection of books I have about Abraham Lincoln, but in particular the conspiracy to assassinate him. The book is: “The True History of the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln and of the Conspiracy of 1865”. The content of the book is essentially the account as told by Louis J. Weichmann.

Weichmann was a friend of John H. Surratt and the Surratt family, including Mary Surratt. He also met and had relationships of varying degrees with many of the so-called conspirators, including John Wilkes Booth, in the killing of Abraham Lincoln and the attempted assassination of others. Because of this association, Weichmann was initially held by authorities as a possible conspirator but eventually much of his testimony was used to convict members of this group.

The book details the testimony and trial of the conspirators (all were charged and tried together). A few years after the initial trial, John H. Surratt was captured and tried and Weichmann details this as well.

Aside from the complicated mess of evidence, real and fabricated, it doesn’t take long to realize that the words and written testimony of those involved in the trial, are held in high esteem by both the author and the courts. Seldom was a person’s word brought into question unless it could be accurately proven to be a falsehood. Time was not wasted attempting to blur the evidence or present a person’s testimony as something it wasn’t in order to have influence over the jury. Words were either fact or fiction and if fiction you better have real proof. If it was proven a man lied, nothing that specific individual had to say or offer in the case had any value and was completely disregarded. Otherwise, a man’s word was seldom questioned as society still viewed a person’s word as something to honor and respect.

Can the same be said for today? We witness courtroom testimony and the words of witnesses, judges, lawyers, etc. and much of what they say, if not an outright lie, is misleading and meant to be so. Each side strives for a desired outcome and subjective morals and subjective truths are used in order to get there.

This is not relegated to just the courtrooms however. Take our media for example. Where once it was mostly taken as a “journalist’s” moral responsibility and obligation to tell only the facts as can be substantiated, now it’s more about ratings and who can be the first to tell a story about an event regardless of the accuracy of the content.

We Americans find ourselves once again mired in another presidential campaign, along with elections of certain member seats in the House and Senate. Honest and unbiased reasoning shows us there is little justification to trust a politician’s word about anything and yet as sure as flies are attracted to garbage, voters are drawn to the words, not perhaps because of the truths they may hold but for the want of what those recitations promise. We care not if anything uttered is truth, just that what they say images our desired subjective truths and morals. We are so fickle!

It is readily discussed these days, and surely who can argue, that what once was news is now entertainment. One coined word for this is “infotainment”. While it may be entertainment, and some members of this “news” entertainment might willingly agree to its description, it certainly is not presented to the masses of people as entertainment. Shouldn’t it be? Or has everything that involves truth and morality become subjective? Of course it has. American people take comedy and entertainment shows like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart or Colbert Nation with Stephen Colbert as legitimate news shows. We are so volatile!

At essentially every level of American society, progressiveness, i.e. the “development of an individual or society in a direction considered more beneficial than and superior to the previous level”, exists to some degree. We are all guilty. But what happens when one’s desires and idealism become the driving force in their life? To what lengths will they go and what conservative values are they willing to abandon in order to achieve that thought of as a, “superior level”?

None of this is new. This idea that morals and truth is subjective, meaning that one’s mind and thoughts can rightly justify the devaluing of objective truth, has been around in the minds of men for many centuries. Søren Aabye Kierkegaard, a Danish philosopher who died at age 42 and lived from 1813 – 1855, said: “…the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die.” He also was quoted as saying: “When he is nearest to being in two places at the same time he is in passion; but passion is momentary, and passion is also the highest expression of subjectivity.”

Because someone is passionate about what they might believe, say and do, this can justify subjective truth and the lack of adherence to a moral compass? Wasn’t it James Madison who said that the only way our founding Constitution and Bill of Rights would ever survive was if the nation maintained a moral backbone. It has not. As a matter of fact, the so-called progressives have managed to convince our American youth that the worship of God Almighty played no role in the construction of our constitution and thus the end result is a promotion of subjective morals and truth, leaving a nation lacking in leadership to seek Kierkegaard’s truth – that which is true to me.

When considering this kind of thought and the results of those thoughts, also acknowledge how this enters into the many debates that exist in this country that are “passionate” and often, if not always, embroiled in one’s subjective truth. In the work that I do, this is prevalent in the debates about wildlife management and the environment. Just pick a subject.

The Bible says in John 14:6, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father except through Me.” For those who still adhere to objective truth and morals, God told us in his Word, that He alone was the Truth. Man’s words therefore can only be held to account of the Word of God in seeking truth. When’s the last time that happened in this country?

For the secular minded, be it told that Nazi Germany based its “truth” to justify the murdering of innocent humans on Darwin’s principle of “survival of the fittest”, therefore discovering their Kierkegaard kind of truth in killing those they believed to be inferior human beings. They also relied on Friedrich Nietzsche’s belief that: “Since there is no God to will what is good, we must will our own good. And since there is no eternal value, we must will the eternal recurrence of the same state of affairs.”

Not that the United States has now become Nazi Germany but provided that this nation, including each of us as accountable individuals, as well as our governments, powerful media sources, non governmental agencies, etc., continues down this road of dissing the Truth of God’s word and seeking their own truth to fit their agendas and ideals, we can only expect to witness a more blatant and intended bunch of lies in order to accomplish our goals.

God’s word is Truth. Every moral compass of the world should point to the Truth. When it does not, the lies become commonplace and those creating and perpetuating those lies will have succeeded in convincing themselves that “their truth” is what works for them and therefore all others become the lies.

Share