API tools faq
paste
Lesta

20 Lesta Nediam POST2017-01-02 1545 Lesta's Lie System Posts

Lesta
Jan 1st, 2017
56
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 11.98 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Lesta Nediam POST2017-01-02 1545 Lesta's Lie System Posts
  2. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/6kGv3T9YzCa
  3. https://plus.google.com/photos/photo/117873732377568769298/6370880201699159410
  4. https://pastebin.com/GDgMSuu6
  5. __
  6.  
  7. 2017-01-02 1545 __ *WHEN TRUTH IS ROUTINELY PRESENTED IN THE SAME FORM THAT A LIE WOULD NEED TO TAKE THE POPULATION BECOMES UNABLE TO RECOGNISE LIES WHEN THEY ARE PRESENTED AS TRUTH IN THIS SPECIAL WAY*. _Study the attached image_.
  8.  
  9. VIEW POST AND COMMENTS: https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/6kGv3T9YzCa
  10.  
  11. Intelligent people (whether individuals or groups) who want the ability to lie to others on a *consistently successful basis* (as required or desired) make use of what Lesta identified in 2015 as the "lie system".
  12.  
  13.  
  14. By consistently presenting truth in the same form a lie would need to take the population becomes trained (from birth) to accept lies when they are presented (as "truth") in this same manner.
  15.  
  16.  
  17. _That is the central idea behind the "lie system"_.
  18.  
  19.  
  20. (Note: "consistently successful lying" means "not ever getting caught". Regardless of what is a lie people will always accuse liars of lying and dishonest people will always accuse honest people of lying. *A lie is successful if it cannot be proven a lie* and lying on a consistently successful basis is what the "lie system" enables.)
  21.  
  22.  
  23. This "effect" (consistently successful lying) is the result of a simple kind of "censorship" which is achieved by intentionally and systematically withholding what has been termed "sufficient proof".
  24.  
  25.  
  26. Sufficient proof is a *specialised lie system term* meaning _"that which *necessarily proves* an event or claim to be true and real"_. Sufficient proof is not to be confused with "enough proof" or "a lot of proof" etc.
  27.  
  28.  
  29. In Lesta's lie system nomenclature if something is not "sufficient proof" then it is considered "proof's appearances". That which does not necessarily prove an event or claim to be true and real *has a "truth value of zero"*.
  30.  
  31.  
  32. If something is alleged to have happened and there are ten different "items of proof" offered in support of it *but none of these items of "proof" necessarily prove the claim to be true and real* then you have "ten times zero" which is zero.
  33.  
  34.  
  35. Although *psychologically* it may feel like you have a lot of something you have in actuality *_a whole lot of nothing_*.
  36.  
  37.  
  38. It may be that the claim is indeed true - _but it is not true for the reasons provided (the "items of proof")_. In the example the ten "items of proof" serve to create a *"psychological stacking"* effect whereby it can feel as though the claim must have really happened. *But even if it did - _it did not happen because of the "proof" (i.e., proof's appearances) offered_*.
  39.  
  40.  
  41. It is important to understand that the absence of sufficient proof *does not mean that an event or claim did not happen*. While it may not have happened _it does not *necessarily* mean it did not_.
  42.  
  43.  
  44. It is also important to understand that if something alleged to happen did not happen then we can expect in a lie system to be offered a whole lot of "proof's appearances" so as to create the *psychological effect that it did happen*.
  45.  
  46.  
  47. Until late 2015 - when I was still figuring these things out - *Lesta made two primary mistakes that went hand in hand*.
  48.  
  49.  
  50. 1) The first mistake I made was to assume an event did not happen *because it lacked sufficient proof*. I would later identify and call this the "fallacy of the conspiracy theorist" (I'll elaborate on that in a moment).
  51.  
  52.  
  53. 2) The second mistake was with the approach I took when trying to engage people to think about events that are reported on the nightly news. I would claim that events lacking sufficient proof *did not happen* to those who believed that they did and asked them to "prove" it happened. *I knew that because "sufficient proof" was absent the other person would be unable to do so*.
  54.  
  55.  
  56. It was my intention to get such people to then see that their belief about an event happening *was based on proof's appearances and emotion rather than actual proof*.
  57.  
  58.  
  59. However - this approach was *very unsuccessful* and had to be abandoned because it caused more problems than it sought to solve. I had underestimated the strength of pre-existing belief-bias in others (i.e., their inability to perceive and process events in any other way than through the lens which they currently perceive them). Each person has an "internal belief" about how the world functions and is often unwilling to let go of it (let alone revise it) when a different way of seeing things is presented.
  60.  
  61.  
  62. Most people will prefer to cling to the way they perceive the machinations of the world *even when their interpretation of them cannot be true*. (I have a solution to this predicament which I'll mention in a future post.)
  63.  
  64.  
  65. As a result of this unsuccessful approach I have been called a "hoaxtard" and an "auto-hoaxer" etc. It is unlikely that those who call me a "hoaxtard" will ever understand what I was trying to do and so to them I can only say: *"Okay, you got me! During 2015 I was a hoaxtard _but then I advanced my thinking_"*.
  66.  
  67.  
  68. In order to continue hating on Lesta those haters need to work as "social-media archaeologists" [TW!] who excitedly dig up fossilised comments and videos which contained statements I have either *long since abandoned* or made in order *to bait a conversation about "sufficient proof"*.
  69.  
  70.  
  71. These dishonest troublemakers do not care that I no longer claim or think those things (or that they misunderstood my original intentions for bringing them up). *All that matters to them is that Lesta had once upon a time made some silly statements* - even though they were said at a time when I was still very much figuring out the problem and have long since moved on from them. _In this way they are like terrible parents who beat their children because as babies they could not walk_.
  72.  
  73.  
  74. *If I were still asserting those fossilised statements from the past which these scoundrels have dug up and bandy about then they would have a point - _but alas for them I do not_*.
  75.  
  76.  
  77. The reason I was a "hoaxtard" during 2015 was because I committed what I came to call the *"fallacy of the conspiracy theorist"*. The fallacy works like this:
  78.  
  79.  
  80. *"If something CAN be proven with sufficient proof but HAS NOT been proven with sufficient proof THEN IT MUST BE FALSE."*
  81.  
  82.  
  83. In other words - it is a mistake to conclude that the reason "sufficient proof" for an event or claim has not been provided is because it does not exist *and that it does not exist because the event or claim in question is an outright deception*.
  84.  
  85.  
  86. While at times that may be the case *it is not necessarily always the case* for there can be true events that really did happen which have sufficient proof *that can be presented to the population* _but is being *withheld* for one reason or another_. (Not just because we are in a lie system!)
  87.  
  88.  
  89. The reason for my error (i.e, making me indistinguishable from a "hoaxtard") was not due to malice (though if you listen to some of my haters they would have you believe I am the most evil person to ever live). *The reason I made this error* is because during 2015 *I still had a belief* that we were in an *"honest enough system"* whereby the nightly news etc. *would not intentionally* withhold sufficient proof (i.e., unless there was an *innocent reason* not to provide it such as due to excessive gore).
  90.  
  91.  
  92. While it has been a very long time since I trusted the nightly news or newspapers _I did not think or suspect that "sufficient proof" was being *intentionally* withheld_.
  93.  
  94.  
  95. In recent times the nightly news and newspapers have taken to hating on "conspiracy theorists" who claim that events did not happen. *It is the nightly news and newspapers that are solely responsible for the creation of these "conspiracy theorists"*!
  96.  
  97.  
  98. _Yes - they sure are!_
  99.  
  100.  
  101. By "conspiracy theorists" I am talking about *genuine people* who mean well and who honestly think that an event did not happen as opposed to liars and other agents of disinformation *who do not care if an event happened because they will relentlessly insist it did not*. (Or vice-versa as is the case with "Pizza-Gate" where dishonest people are insisting that "pizza-gate" is real even if they do not believe it is.)
  102.  
  103.  
  104. It was during 2015 that I realised my thinking errors and eliminated them which then allowed me to recognise we are living in a lie system. A lie system that intentionally and systematically withholds sufficient proof in order to present truth in the same form a lie would need to take *so that when it is required or desired lies can be presented as truth (in the same special way) and be accepted as truth by the population*.
  105.  
  106.  
  107. The lack of trust I had felt in the nightly news came from the feeling that something was "missing or held back" - and in 2015 I realised that "something" was "sufficient proof". (The "International Space Station" ["ISS"] is what *proves* that "sufficient proof" is being intentionally and systematically withheld but I won't go into that with this post.)
  108.  
  109.  
  110. Because the absence of sufficient proof causes *intellectually vulnerable* people to commit the "fallacy of the conspiracy theorist" that is why the nightly news and newspapers are *responsible* for the creation of "conspiracy theorists". *By not providing access to "sufficient proof" they make "conspiracy thinking" possible in the first place*. (In a lie system this is by design.)
  111.  
  112.  
  113. Each person who loses trust in the "lie system" begins to suspect that everything presented in the "nightly news" is a lie and a hoax even though that may not necessarily be the case. It is the way that "truth" for events and claims is routinely presented by the nightly news that enables the belief "everything is a hoax" to arise.
  114.  
  115.  
  116. This is because the potential "hoaxtard" instinctually realises that "sufficient proof" is not being provided though they may not be able to articulate this feeling until they read my words. Such a person becomes prone to calling events a "hoax" and risks becoming an "auto-hoaxer".
  117.  
  118.  
  119. For a period of time during 2015 I did fall victim to this way of thinking before realising and correcting myself. Only then was I able to rise above the "planned dichotomy" of "event skeptic" versus "event realist" which keeps a lot of people squabbling on the Internet without making any meaningful progress (though I won't go into that with this post).
  120.  
  121.  
  122. It is now 2017 and it's time to present the lie system concepts in a simple and undeniable way to so-called "conspiracy theorists". Those who are exposed to the lie system concepts but reject them will reveal themselves to be either "one of them" (or indistinguishable from one of them) or too stupid to have an opinion about events and claims.
  123.  
  124.  
  125. Certainly - if someone else had pointed these things out to me early on I would not have made the mistakes I did.
  126.  
  127.  
  128. Of course - not everyone who "doesn't get it" will necessarily be a so-called "shill" but they will have demonstrated that when presented with something obvious and undeniable *if they cannot grasp it then they are best ignored* _for they can only get in the way of meaningful progress_.
  129.  
  130.  
  131. *On that note it must be understood that the "lie system" is not the only problem we face - _there is the "algorithm" as well_*. Both are formidable and so in 2017 Lesta cannot go on wasting time with time-wasters.
  132.  
  133.  
  134. It is time for the disfigured handful - the genuine skeptics who seek *true things for true reasons* - to grow a few more fingers so that we may at long last get things done!
  135.  
  136.  
  137. ______________________________________________________________
  138. My name is Lesta Nediam and I am cracking reality like a nut.
  139.  
  140. Lesta Nediam's YouTube Channel:
  141. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w
  142.  
  143. Lesta Nediam's Google Plus:
  144. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ
  145.  
  146. Lesta Nediam's Twitter:
  147. https://twitter.com/LestaNediam
  148.  
  149. Lesta Nediam's Public Comments:
  150. https://pastebin.com/u/Lesta
  151.  
  152. What does not exist - exists to exist.
  153. What exists - exists to always exist.
  154. As it is written - so it is done.
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!