Welkom - Welcome.

Dit is mijn persoonlijke site, gewoon over mezelf, wat ik doe, waar ik op hoop , waar ik aan denk en wat ik graag heb.
This is my personal page, just about myself, what i do, hope for and like.
Aside of that i am doing research on a new kind of "weirdness syndrom" on the rise .....Scary and fascinating, a paradigm shift , a Black Swan or call it Wild Card ...but a huge surprise in any case. The challenge is to put the entire picture together, its all in the PATTERNS. More on this in my (ongoing) research on modern syndroms, and my guess that "the singularity is present, a true story of the past".

Saturday, 30 May 2009

Two intervieuws with Richard Feynman on science and on authority .

Both subjects and the way R Feynman Presents them are very dear to me, this is why i chose those two pieces to post here. Aside of that often his stories about his father, and the bothsided love that speaks out of these is moving me. I did love my own father very much, he died in 2000 , but i miss him still sometimes as if it was yesterday or even more than in the beginning.

Richard Feynman: Disrepect for Authority

Richard Feynman on "Social Sciences"

Friday, 29 May 2009

Education , totally not aware how it forms all our basic aspects of life .

How to Cope With a Controlling Parent

Hoe omgaan met een dominante/manipulatieve ouder

Extra beschadigend is dat kinderen van narcistische ouders vaak niet het negatieve effect ervaren dat het narcisme van hun ouders heeft op hun gevoel van eigenwaarde, hun zelfbeeld, de relaties die zij met anderen onderhouden en hun tevredenheid over hun leven in het algemeen. Deze effecten zijn vaak verborgen en niet makkelijk te herkennen.

Als je bent opgevoed door één of zelfs twee narcistische ouders, is je geleerd dat de narcist altijd gelijk heeft en jij nooit. Dit leidt ertoe dat je gaat twijfelen aan je eigen beoordelingsvermogen. En waarschijnlijk het gevoel hebt dat je het nooit goed genoeg kan doen. Maar ook dat je nooit hebt ingezien dat dit geen normale gevoelens zijn om te ervaren tijdens je jeugd maar dat deze voortkomen uit gedragingen, die symptomatisch zijn voor een persoonlijkheidsstoornis. Want een narcistische ouder is niet echt in staat tot houden van kinderen, zo’n ouder houdt alleen van wat een kind voor hem of haar kan betekenen.
Bron: http://mens-en-samenleving.infonu.nl/psychologie/19415-het-narcistische-gezin-als-ouders-enkel-van-zichzelf-houden.htmlMeer? Voor meer informatieve artikelen ga je naar www.infonu.nlMee schrijven? Meld je nu aan als Infoteur, schrijf mee, deel je kennis en genereer inkomsten!

Sunday, 24 May 2009

The Coming Superbrain By JOHN MARKOFF May 24, 2009

Week in Review The Coming Superbrain By JOHN MARKOFF Published: May 24, 2009
Artificial intelligence is back in fashion, which raises the question: Will computer intelligence surpass our own?

Saturday, 16 May 2009

Machines (Or Back To Humans)

Machines / Back to Humans - Queen
It's a Machine's world Don't tell me I ain't got no soul When the machines take over It ain't no place for you and me. They tell me I don't care But deep inside I'm just a man They freeze me they burn me They squeeze me they stress me With smoke-blackened pistons of steel they compress me But no-one, but no-one, but no-one can wrest me away Back to Humans. We have no disease, no troubles of mind No thank you please, no regard for the time We never cry, we never retreat We have no conception of love or defeat. What's that Machine noise It's bytes and megachips for tea It's that Machine, boys With Random Access Memory Never worry, never mind Not for money, not for gold. It's software it's hardware It's heartbeat is time-share It's midwife's a disk drive It's sex-life is quantised It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised. Back to Humans Back to Humans. Back to Machines. Living in a new world Thinking in the past Living in a new world How you gonna last Machine world... It's a Machine's world... Change. Back to Humans.

Will We Be Nodes On The Internet?

World Wide Mind

The Ethics of Intelligent Machines
"In his Theory of Justice, Rawls said humans behind a veil of ignorance (i.e., without any knowledge of their own social position) would want to distribute wealth in a way to maximize the welfare of those worst off. Given our ignorance of conditions past the singularity, this seems like a good principle”

Friday, 15 May 2009

Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push

Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push

Posted using ShareThis

Stages in getting knowlegde and answers to unanswered questions are the same stages of the evolution of science (Thomas Khun)

Knowing more about knowledge helps to get more knowledge, and understand what knowledge is.

Before we try to understand what is in fact happening to us (as targetted individiuals) we need to know more about what understanding and knowledge really is and how it works. In philosophy this discipline is called “epistemology” and is a very fundamental one researching the basic principles of knowledge. Science and its methods have used these principles in any kind of scientific discipline and therefore science was so successful in understanding the world, discovering physics, understanding biology and developing advanced technology. So if we want to be successful in understanding what is going on, those principles also can be for us very useful. This may seem difficult but explained brief and clear its easy to understand and makes thinking about anything much easier.The general principles and stages of evolution of knowledge are pretty similar for one individual, a team of scientists, or the evolution of knowledge for the entire humanity. This is why they apply to all knowledge in general.Understanding a situation is nothing but trying to connect facts a way we get a picture that makes sense. We can compare this with a detective who investigates a murder and tries to find out who did it by putting all information he has together, eliminate suspects and reason about all different possible answers until he finds the best one, or the right one.

Unexpected facts and surprising new events is a special case of knowledge.
For us the most specifically interesting part of this is when knowledge concerns facts that are “unexpected”, facts that don’t fit into the mainstream worldview. This is precisely the situation we are confronted with being totally surprised by suddenly some technology targeting us that most of us never even thought about before that, and most people don’t even know it exists.There is something very specific on unexpected facts and surprising events in history. A science philosopher who described this very accurate is Thomas Kuhn who described this situation of unexpected facts for the evolution of science, but because the same applies to individuals, it can be very helpful to us as well.
Thomas Kuhn focussed on science not being just as logical process, but a historical and social one too, and just because of that the evolution of it has very specific characteristics when new unexpected facts show up.He introduced the term “paradigm” another word for the mainstream accepted worldview or scientific consensus of a specific time or moment, and described his theory in a world-famous book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Kuhn, stages of knowledge and paradigm shifts.

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called "paradigm shifts" , in which the nature of scientific inquiry within a particular field is abruptly transformed.In general, science is broken up into three distinct stages.1 Prescience, which lacks a central paradigm, comes first.2 This is followed by "normal science", when scientists attempt to enlarge the central paradigm by "puzzle-solving". Thus, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher.3 As anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along with the anomalous results into one framework, is accepted. This is termed revolutionary science.

The theory of stages of knowledge of Thomas Khun applied to our situation.
Position of the world and its central current paradigm.Our world and the people who don’t know about mind control and its victims, are in the stage of normal science with a central paradigm that considers hearing voices as mental illness, and things like mind control, alien abductions or channelling and clairvoyance impossible to take seriously as scientific fact. .That those things are increasing so fast that one would expect scientist to ask themselves questions about it, does not happen because as Khun says “, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher” This explains perfectly why our complaints on mind control not considered any reason to question the current paradigm, but as something impossible or unimportant, because they do not fit into the mainstream current worldview.
Our position of prescience knowing some facts are real but not yet having a definitive new paradigm to explain them and trying to fill the gaps on different ways
.Our position as targets is different than the one of outsiders, and can be considered as the stage of prescience that lacks a central paradigm when it concerns the targeting. to us it was a surprise too becoming aware of these facts that contradicted the things we knew and believed before we were targeted, and the only information we have is what we experience, what other targets tell, and what we get as public knowledge about all kind of technology from media and books.Most of us are trying to connect all this to an explanation that makes sense, but in fact we still lack essential information because of the secrecy of this, and on top we are being actively deceived and manipulated by the technology to believe all different things and deceptive half truths, and this results in many different stories and debates but without a mutual conclusion that we can be sure of and all agree on.
Distinguishing facts and gap filling opinions is not easy.
I do agree on one single thing with Eleanor white and that is with her statement that we should make a difference between our opinions and facts. But at the same time she does not apply this principle correctly herself …..(I won’t explain this now because it would lead us too far) This only shows that distinguishing facts from subjective opinions and impressions is not so easy as it seems. We must really avoid jumping to conclusions and being aware very well of what are the facts we can be sure of and start from there.

The objective increase will lead to a paradigm shift after a while automatically
And the number of targets keeps growing, not only because each year there is a group added to the list, but on top each year this group of new targets becomes bigger. This is a fact that we can be sure of because it is visible in the patterns of all surveys no matter from were they come. This evolution seems to continue and a certain moment there will be so many of us that the world will reach stage 3 of Kuhn’s stages in knowledge were “anomalous results build up” and science of mainstream knowledge will reach a crisis and the huge mountain of not understood facts will be connected with each other and with the old paradigm to a totally new world view or as Thomas Kuhn calls it, a paradigm shift. The technology tries to make this happen as late as possible, using all kind of deception and camouflage, in order to keep the secrecy as long as possible,.

Does PUBLIC KNOWLEGDE OF THE TECHNOLOGY justifies the PRIVACY VIOLATION?A question of ethics and priorities.
Due to the consistent exponent ional increase of numbers of targets we can suppose that the purpose is on longer term to make the existence of this technology public and this may give us some hope towards the future because the public knowledge of this technology is the best way to prevent abuse in the future, even if the violation of our privacy is a side effect of knowing about the technology to every individual not just in theory but in practice,Personally I consider the public knowledge and debate on these emerging technologies considered the dangers as the possible benefits for all, even maybe the possibility to create a better world, more important than anything else, and privacy seems of a secondary order just as our cell phone provider knows each moment were we are but we don’t worry about it anymore as long it is not used against us we don’t care. Lets hope that my optimism is justified.

For who is interested in the puzzle solving philosophical part feedback demanded.
In case we want to be as successful as possible in understanding what is happening to us and to know what to think of it ourselves, and speed up this process the technology will become public, we need to uncover the deception and be extremely logical in drawing conclusions principles of knowledge can be very helpful to us, as they were to scientist in history. I will try to bring up one subject from time to time as clear as possible and step by step so that we can discuss on one specific part of it to get more answers to our questions. For who finds this a useful idea, I need to know from all of you as much as possible if I explain things clear enough, or if some of you don’t see connections in what I say or don’t understand why I say certain things or what I precisely mean. This can help me to learn to explain clearly what I want to say and understand better what others think and why as well So questions or remarks or any kind of feedback is more than welcome, this is finally what has been done by philosopher’s throughout history to get wiser about the world. The next 2 subject I will touch is unexpected events in history and the principles of deception. More suggestions welcome too.
Greetings Monika

Wednesday, 6 May 2009

Low-probability High-impact Events Have a Dominant role in History

Low-probability High-impact Events Have a Dominant role in History
In foresight research, "wild cards" refer to low-probability, high-impact events.
Arguably the best known work in Wild Cards comes from John Petersen author of 'Out of The Blue - How to Anticipate Big Future Surprises'. Petersen's book articulates a series of events that due to their likelihood to surprise and potential for impact might be considered 'Wildcards'. He defines Wild Cards as 'Low Probability, High Impact events that, were they to occur, would severely impact the human condition'
The idea is similar to the Black swan theory described by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his 2007 book The Black Swan. the "Black Swan" theory (capitalized) refers only to events of large consequence and their dominant role in history. Taleb regards almost all major scientific discoveries, historical events, and artistic accomplishments as "black swans" — undirected and unpredicted. Taleb's Black Swan has a central and unique attribute: the high impact. His claim is that almost all consequential events in history come from the unexpected—while humans convince themselves that these events are explainable in hindsight (bias).

Was It a Wild Card or Just Our Blindness to Gradual Change?
Elina Hiltunen Finland Futures Research Centre
Journal of Futures Studies, November 2006, 11(2): 61 - 74
Can wild cards be anticipated? Mendonça et al. (2004) and Petersen (1999) also very clearly announce that signals of wild cards,most of the time, are available. Petersen (1999) calls these signals early warnings orearly indicators, whereas Mendonça et al.(2004) calls them weak signals.The only thing we can do about anticipating wild cards is to try to look below the noise level(Coffman 1997b) in order to spot the weak signals. This can be done, for example, byusing effective environmental scanning systems and focusing on extraordinary sourcesof information, like scanning the movements of minorities and activists of the society.

Monday, 4 May 2009

Paradigm Shift ( The Technological Revolution )

This is so REAL about what is ongoing but still camouflaged by deception, the targets are not even believed ....

Sunday, 3 May 2009

Some letters i wrote the past days

To ICC about the abuse of the technology

TO Leonard G. Holmes The first therapist i did hear wondering "could this be done remotely?"
His article What the Heck is Satanic Ritual Abuse? IS REALLY WORTH READING
[Note:1] Leonard Holmes, Ph.D. Towson, Maryland: The Sidran Institute, 2000

To Dr Vaughan Bell (from the article in the NY times last years about the mindcontrol sites