March 23, 2018

Mouse Asks Cat To Find Out Who’s Baiting The Trap

A whistleblower says that scaring investors in the Stock Market is a planned event, manipulated by those inline to make a profit from it.

I don’t pretend to be a financial expert, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once. According to this article, the whistleblower is trying to seek the help of what is part of the rigged system to fix the rigged system: “One of the most popular measures of volatility is being manipulated, charges one individual who submitted a letter anonymously to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.”

It is more than likely the Securities and Exchange Commission, et. al. already know about this because they helped invent it. Give me a break. This is part of the mental derangement that exists with people in this country, and I suppose worldwide.

Isn’t it insanity for a mouse to ask the cat to fix the bait in the trap that the cat already controls? This is what we seem to do best thinking it’s a cure. It’s a rigged system. You can fix a rigged system.


Wildlife Management: Scientism, Abstraction, Encapsulation, Interface

Today, I was reading Wretchard’s “The Case of the Missing Catastrophe,” over and over several times, as it contains some pretty heady stuff. As invigorating as the words may be, or perhaps mind-blowing, depending on one’s perspective and mental prowess, I believe it to be worthy of additional, relevant, thoughts, perhaps knocked down a peg or two into more understandable terms for common brains like mine.

What Fernandez is describing can be broken down into two distinct realities – deliberate manipulation and the exploits of useful idiots. Maybe I can make a bit more sense out of this.

Although Wretchard is discussing the predictions made by most media that we’re all gonna die because Donald Trump first became president and then endorsed recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the GOP is planning a tax reduction. Because prophecied catastrophes have failed to meet the cries of the media, and others, Fernandez suggests that the “models” which drive the predictions of death and destruction at the hands of liberals are being found out to be failures of the biggest kind. Some, not many, can actually recognize these failed predictions, based on “modeling,” and it is growing tiresome. Others lay claim that this is the reason “outsiders,” like Trump, got elected and why most people barely lifted a match, club or rock in protest of the Jerusalem capital decision. I think it safe to say that modeling, designed for outcome-based results, plays a vital part in our everyday lives.

Hidden behind intellectual topics of centralization, globalization, “integration with nature and society,” and such things as evolution and “intertemporal coordination,” what is being discussed is ideology. Idealism always begins with an idea. Where once “models” were the ideas of man to manipulate society, in today’s power and control institutions that more closely resemble technocracies than democracies, employment of computers to sort over ideas and information, hiding what is not wanted and fronting that which fits a narrative, is commonplace. Are we to now understand that somehow a person is exempt from a dishonest promotion of idealism because the “computer modeling” made them do it?

The intentions of modelers remain the same. Because of our love affair with technology and how it has been sold to the public, mentally programs us to believe the computer modeling is a better result than simply the ideas of a man. Strange isn’t it? The stage is set.

Computer modeling is common practice these days. It also works as a major tool of destruction in the ripping apart of society and politics (they go hand in hand as has been designed). The dishonest practice has caused major failures in the scientific world, even though those failures are the means to justify social and political perversion, to achieve agendas. It is a contributor to the injection of anger and hatred into our society as well.

For several years I studied computers and programming. I know enough to be dangerous. I do know how programming works – called coding today. I know how to hide and manipulate data to achieve desired results. That was one of the most basic instruments to learn in programming. Coding today requires knowledge of what end result one desires and writing a program to accomplish that. Imagine when this is placed in the hands of corrupt individuals, groups, corporations, 501 C3 Non Profits, etc. with something other than completely honest dissemination in mind.

I have often said that we live in a Post-Normal world today – up is down, right is left, right is wrong, black is white, etc. With enough money, anyone can pay a computer-literate technician to model anything. It has worked so well government agencies, along with our court system, eagerly rely on faulty and dishonest computer modeling in rendering decisions and crafting legislation.

In the case referenced in the linked-to article, the masses rely so heavily on a heavily manipulated Media, they are unaware that they are being propagandized by only those things they want you to know.

This same process is at play pertaining t0 wildlife management at every level in this country.

In the article referenced, I was taken by and it was pointed out to me, a quote that came from someone commenting on how computer programmers/modelers dealt with complex issues. “Encapsulation enables programmers to avoid conflicts … the code of each object still manipulates data, but the data it manipulates is now private to that object. … This discipline enables programmers to create systems in which a massive number of plans can make use of a massive number of resources without needing to resolve a massive number of conflicting assumptions. Each object is responsible for performing a specialized job; the data required to perform the job is encapsulated within the object

“Abstraction provides stable points of connection while accommodating a wide-range of change on either side of the abstraction boundary. … The abstract purpose is represented by an interface … multiple concrete providers can implement the same abstract service in different concrete ways.”

This is a pretty fancy way of stating that programmers can and are conning the rest of the world with their false manipulation of twisted and perverted data to achieve whatever they or anybody wants.

I have serious doubts that complexity is the issue when it comes to computer modeling. When the modeling is driven by corruption, for corrupt purposes, complexity is irrelevant only to the extent of the desired outcome and perhaps the need to present some kind of distraction or coverup by creating a fake controversy.

In computer modeling – bearing in mind that wildlife management today relies heavily on modeling whether they do it themselves or utilize someone else’s work – it is pointed out above that programmers deal with issues such as “encapsulation,” “abstraction,” and “interface,” to name a few. Combine these headings with corruption and we have new-science Scientism, i.e. “excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge [real of false] and techniques [for corrupt reasons].”

First, a “programmer” (I placed programmer in quotes because that group or individual could vary from one lone programmer to accomplices of varying numbers.) collects data (what begins as useless information until placed in the desired order) and enters it into the computer. Then, someone must decide what data is useful, for what purposes it is useful and how to “encapsulate” that information, i.e. hiding information or using it to drive the outcome.

Encapsulating data is necessary for achieving desired results while hiding information that may cause conflicts or controversy. Politicians are masters at encapsulating information. That’s why they never answer the questions asked them. They hide what they don’t want you to know and sell you on what they do.

In today’s computer modeling, “abstraction” may be the single biggest mode of corruption, especially depending upon the chosen “interface.”

Abstraction, “the quality of dealing with ideas rather than events,” is where the real scientific process gets deliberately lost. Abstraction is necessary to promote ideas (idealism/environmentalism) rather than actual and honest scientific data. Several ideas/events can be contained within “boundaries,” including hidden data, and meted out through “interfaces” to only those listed (concrete providers) as in need (who are paying the money) of the results.

There is a common, tire-kicker expression used to describe the worthless computer-generated outcomes – “garbage in and garbage out.” In many of these cases that is precisely what is taking place. To some of us, the outcome is garbage because the input is garbage. It spells lots of dollars and cents to those dishonest people manipulating the truth. They are gaming the system for political or monetary gain.

Early on I said there were two distinct realities we are dealing with here; deliberate manipulation and the exploits of useful idiots. I would suppose that there is some overlap at varying degrees.

We must first understand that modeling and the effects of this method do not happen only inside a computer. Know that the “modeling” began in someone’s brain. It’s a process and yes, it can be a deceitful one as well. While the computer models yield results, often sought after results, the mind process is taught and carried down through many avenues of brainwashing and propagandizing. In short, we become programmed to think and operate as a computer modeling program in order to reach the desired end.

I have attended seminars in which the goal of the administrators is to manipulate attendees into becoming “change agents.” In other words, they want to brainwash (I know people don’t like that expression, however…) you to accept their propaganda (false modeling) and then go back to where you came from and change everyone’s thoughts to be like theirs. This is all a part of the “modeling” enterprise ruling our world.

Computer modeling is not always bad when used within the context of how it is achieved. It is almost never done that way and that is why my focus seems to be on the criminal aspect of deliberate and dishonest manipulation of the truth. The deliberate manipulators are those whose bent it is to deceive for monetary or political gain. We see computer modeling with such open-to-the-public exchanges involving climate change and wildlife management. Applying the methods I’ve described above, it is easy to see that dishonest encapsulation, abstraction, and interfacing can reap huge monetary windfalls as well as political gain and control.

Dishonest environmental and animal rights groups and there are thousands of them, pay lots of money to get computer models to promote their agendas. With an ignorant populace, who themselves rely upon computer modeled propaganda from multiple media sources, are quick to accept a model presented as a scientific finding. It is a part of our rigged system.

A book could be written citing all the cases where modeling is used as scientific fact for all the wrong reasons. The act is criminal, carried out by criminals.

And so, with those powerful enough to control the way wildlife management is discussed employing modeling as the foundation, is it any wonder that our fish and wildlife employees are nothing more than propagandized automatons, spoon-fed computer modeling as useful scientific data? These become the “useful idiots” who empower those corrupt purveyors of dishonest modeling as science.

When you combine the actual computer modeling with the “education” of the mental version of modeling, together, as change agents, we march into a dishonest world fraught with false knowledge and deception. Many within our fish and wildlife agencies across this land have been reared on modeling and taught the process resulting in a way of thinking that accomplishes the same thing.

Can this be reversed?


Scientific Consensus is Fraud

Recently I shared with readers an article I found called, “Big Science is Broken.” As sometimes Media does, perhaps more articles are being written about the flaws of scientific “study” and “peer review,” sold to the public as “settled science” or “consensus science.” Both of those elements are dangerously fraudulent.

Today, “How ‘Settled Science’ Helped Create a Massive Public Health Crisis,” tells us that consensus in fraudulent, politically manipulated, people control, masquerading as science, can literally kill us.

The article states: “Leslie correctly points out that, despite the patina of pure objectivity, “scientific inquiry is prone to the eternal rules of human social life: deference to the charismatic, herding toward majority opinion, punishment for deviance, and intense discomfort with admitting to error.”

While that statement may be true, it is more of the gas for the vehicle intended to get the human population from Point A, a healthy lifestyle, to Point B, death.

We should cease with dancing around excuses as to why fraudulent science is killing us. Not everyone is that stupid, but unfortunately because, as the article states, social life, deference to the charismatic, herding, punishment, etc., are the known factors bred into human character that allows the Ruling Establishment, whose bent is massive elimination of millions of people, to carry out their plans.

When the Media focuses on issues that only scratch the surface, nothing is ever accomplished, except what most of us refuse to understand – that Media’s role in this is the perpetuation of the social life, deference to the charismatic, herding (brainwashing/propagandizing), and implementing punishments for non conformance. Anyone paying attention should realize that it has only been a matter of time that “science” tells us one thing, and “science” tells us they were wrong. We want to believe, and do believe, that the “correction” has delivered the truth, and yet it never is the truth…only more lies. It’s commonly referred to as insanity and we are too insane to recognize it.

The once-known “scientific method” exists, somewhere, but is rarely seen anymore. It has been replaced, by design, with everything, and more, that is described in the two linked-to articles above. Lost in all of it, is the truth that the lost method is being perpetrated on us by design and the bigger goal isn’t a healthier lifestyle. It is death by self-inflicted adherence to what some brainwashed quack is telling us to do.

Isaiah 53:6 – All we like sheep have gone astray: we have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all.


The Hocus-Pocus of Estimating Deer Harvest….or Something

I recall at a very young age learning the true meaning of the word “assume.” For those not fortunate to have had such a high degree of education, let me help you out – ASSUME = ASS(out of)U(and)ME. Yup! That’s what often happens.

I was reading an article just a few minutes ago by someone trying to explain why the methods of guessing deer numbers and harvest were “good enough.” Here’s what I giggled at in the article: “Say we flip a coin ten times. We know that the chances of getting heads is 50%, but just ten flips may not show that. The more sets of ten coin flips we do, the closer we get to the 50% – to a point. But there also reaches a point where it doesn’t matter if we flip the coin 1,000 times or a million, either way, we will be very close to 50%. The same logic comes to the amount of data on deer harvest we need to collect to accurately illustrate the statewide harvest numbers. Knowing that point, is where the complexities of statistics come in, but be rest assured that they are reliable.”

Perhaps it is “good enough” to flip coins and make assumptions, while disregarding other influencing circumstances, when guessing on deer populations as well as how many deer were harvested. Those who buy into the “good enough” scheme also buy into the idea described above that there’s always a 50-50 chance when flipping a penny a few million times. Actually, it might be more accurate to say the odds are 51-49, but even that estimate can be flawed. What mint of penny is being used? Is it the same penny all the time? Is the coin dirty? Etc.

Science is science – is it not? Yeah, I know. Not for everybody. It’s more exciting to just “assume,” as the article says that regardless of how many times you flip a coin, half the time it’s heads, the other half, tails. This is, of course “assuming” it’s always the same coin, always clean, with no irregularities, flipped by a calibrated machine, the same number of flips, in a vacuum, blah, blah, blah.

Odds are odd. Do we “assume” that with the millions of deer in this country that half the new-born fawns will be male and half female? Yup! (Unless you are one of those that believes there are no bucks left) But scientists tell us that it’s closer to 51-49. It matters not which sex wins….or does it. What causes the skew? Is it man’s influence? Is it 100% natural? If that’s an average, what are the extremes in those birth rates and what causes them? A lot of questions, I know, but, but, but….

When a scientist begins his work to seek an outcome, isn’t the work already flawed once the scientist “assumes” the odds are 50-50? Throughout a scientific progression, the more times “assumptions” are made, it probably is accurate to “assume” there are more errors rendering the results less accurate. The first assumption might be “good enough,” but for whom?

So, does any of this matter when it comes to managing and establishing deer management programs? Mostly likely not. Does it matter if this same “assuming” approach is used in areas where there are but 10,000 estimated deer versus those with 500,000 or more? Do managers continue, for years and years, to make the same “assumptions?” If changes are made to the methods, is it “assumed” that it will not effect the outcome?

Has anyone spent the time to determine what the “odds” are in making “assumptions”, that those “assumptions” are skewing reality in any one direction more than another? If there are “assumed” outcomes in two directions, is it “assumed” that half the time it’s one way and half the time the other? I assume you have had just about enough of this gibberish.

Seems silly doesn’t it? One of the problems with this method of making assumptions, is that it really is the beginning stages of outcome-based political manipulation disguised as science – I mean, honestly, isn’t it? That 50-50 odds for coin flipping is perfect for politics, but is worthless when dealing in scientific terms.

There are certain things deer biologists can do that will improve the results of their guessing. And that’s good enough…evidently. However, one of those things should be a scientific-based survey to right the ship and get it reconnoitered and back on course. That works better than relying, always, on a coin flip. After all, it takes a person to flip the coin and somehow I have little faith in the direction of the wind or the Flim-Flam Man.



The world can’t afford another financial crash – it could destroy capitalism as we know it

But no developed nation today could possibly tolerate another wholesale banking crisis and proper, blood and guts recession.

We are too fragile, fiscally as well as psychologically. Our economies, cultures and polities are still paying a heavy price for the Great Recession; another collapse, especially were it to be accompanied by a fresh banking bailout by the taxpayer, would trigger a cataclysmic, uncontrollable backlash.

Source: The world can’t afford another financial crash – it could destroy capitalism as we know it – Telegraph


The US Military Is Decimating Everything In Its Path, Including Its Own Country

The military industrial complex has been completely out of control for so long that the consequences to life on Earth may soon be total. The US military leadership has virtually no regard for anything or anyone including its own soldiers. In the military’s endless and insatiable quest to expand and control the entire planet and everyone on it, all is expendable. This includes the environment (even in its own country),  and the citizens of the United States which it claims to defend. Though climate engineering is the epitome of the military’s assault against its own citizens and the biosphere, there are countless other examples which all have dire consequences. Finally, the population is beginning to wake up to the ongoing insanity.

Source: The US Military Is Decimating Everything In Its Path, Including Its Own Country » The US Military Is Decimating Everything In Its Path, Including Its Own Country | Geoengineering Watch


Mark McCandlish Geoengineering Chemtrails Weather Modification


Australian Government Manipulating Temperatures to Fit Warming Narrative

The following link takes you to some very interesting information as to how the Australian Government deliberately manipulated and increased temperatures in order to promote and fit into the narrative of a warming climate….due of course to the presence of man. Tons of information available.<<<Discover More>>>


Drudge Headline Page Reads Like We Live In Gestapoland

Just now I went to Drudge to catch the latest headlines. Upon scanning most of them on the home page, I wondered in what country I was actually living in and under whose regime I am a subject of.

WTH? Is this a true reflection of life in America now? Or, is Drudge embellishing stories with trumped up and misleading headlines to sell copy and/or to perpetuate the chaos and hatred among the masses?

I was especially drawn to the main headline that, “Nations Turn to UN.”

Leave thoughts below in comment section if you wish to reply.

DRUDGE REPORT 2014® 2013-10-25 11-27-40


Facebook: Where Minds Shrivel and Wretchedly Expire For Lack Of What is Found

This is not a session for bashing Facebook for all the terrible things that it is. For those with brains enough to care, they understand the issues of privacy, manipulation, censorship, invasion of privacy, intrusion by government and non governmental agencies of recording every entry all of us have made on the giant scroll. As to the words of the Egyptian Pharaoh, “So shall it be written, so shall it be done.”

Facebook has a purpose, however, for myself coming from an older generation, I fail to see any useful design in Facebook other than it swindles the mind, preys on our addictive dispositions and can control nearly every aspect of our lives, when we allow it. Nothing that does that to a human being can be good.

And yet with all the enslaving power of Facebook, for the lack of what is found, it is a malnourishment that degrades creative and independent thought while humans are unknowingly cheated from the pleasure and excitement of learning truth.

Facebook is fun. It has some aspects that can actually, in a positive way, contribute to a productive society. I’ll not stretch the limits of my own honesty to enable what I perceive as a wretched curse.

One dynamic of Facebook is that it tends to “group” together people of similar interests, i.e. political, social, intellectual ideals, etc.. This, in and of itself, may not necessarily be a bad thing, it becomes so when people become like leeches sucking off the blood of each other, eventually resulting in malnourishment and death by starvation.

Beyond responsible use of Facebook for entertainment purposes, it becomes a harbinger of intellectual laziness. Members who have had the lifeblood extracted from their minds report faithfully to their “groups” to receive marching orders. Unwilling or unable to disseminate truth from fiction, verbose rhetoric is ingested by the parasitic minions believing they are finding sustenance when in reality they are devouring the defecation of the deceitful.

Group think and support is not a bad thing. Being obsessed by it is. My challenge to readers is to get off Facebook. If you can’t use it responsibly as a “social networking” tool, you have no life. You’re among the walking dead. Stop regurgitating someone else’s ideas. Get truth for yourself. It’s worth the effort and it’s much more rewarding than Facebook.

Tom Remington