API tools faq
paste
Advertisement
Lesta

30 Lesta Nediam LNC2017-08-04 0725 +Palm Survival

Lesta
Aug 3rd, 2017
93
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 8.79 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Lesta Nediam LNC2017-08-04 0725 +Palm Survival
  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W64m7rr0sK0&lc=z22xjtcqhrqyjxhjt04t1aokg5jmw213qfycegrpsngcrk0h00410
  3. https://pastebin.com/RKfmKRhx
  4. __
  5.  
  6. +Palm Survival __ Thank you for replying. If you have not understood the presentation then there are likely others who also haven't so allow me to make some notes for your benefit and theirs. Please get back to me after you have read through the following to let me know if it has helped. By all means ask any questions if something isn't clear.
  7.  
  8. __
  9.  
  10. I began with a series of photos and artwork displayed side by side. The artwork I showed became progressively more "realistic".
  11.  
  12. Each photo was objectively a real photo and each piece of artwork was objectively a piece of artwork (i.e., not real). I provided links to each image used in the video description.
  13.  
  14. There were a few points made in this presentation and I will provide some notes to help understand them. It is _difficult_ to explain everything as I'd like in a mere five or six minute presentation. And it is _especially difficult_ to do this when I am aware that many people watching YouTube videos have only a two to three minute attention span.
  15.  
  16. One of the things I pointed out was that humans are very good at recognising the quality of "realness" when it is _seen._ The first photo/artwork pair I showed was of a _drawing_ of the Moon and everyone can instantly recognise that it lacks "realness".
  17.  
  18. By the time I got to the "fruit in water" pair it became more difficult to discern between photo and artwork but upon scrutiny (by zooming in on the image's details) the picture that was artwork became obvious.
  19.  
  20. Finally, I concluded the series of image pairs with a purported photo of the Earth from space showing the entirety of its shape that is not supposed to be a composite (i.e., it's supposed to be a pure/full/single photo).
  21.  
  22. Many "normal people" who look at the Earth from space photo perceive it as a _real_ photo that is _not_ artwork. It appears perfectly real to them. However - when that picture is contrasted with Moon imagery (which is easily observed as real) it becomes _possible_ for "normal people" to _notice_ that the Earth from space photo *lacks* the same kind of *"realness"*.
  23.  
  24. "Normal people" may not quite be able to describe why it lacks "realness" but comparing it to the Moon makes it possible for them to notice that _"something"_ is lacking. "Realness" is an often indescribable quality which we can recognise instantly when seen - though sometimes it helps to compare it to something!
  25.  
  26. People who debunk the flat Earth meme never simply show a photo of the Earth from space and be done with the topic. Why not? The reason they rely on mathematical proofs and "technical evidence" is because on _some_ level these "debunkers" instinctively realise that the Earth from space photos lack "realness" and better resemble artwork.
  27.  
  28. _Thus they are inadmissible!_
  29.  
  30. After all - if you have *genuine photographic evidence* that *proves* what you are claiming then why in crikey's good name wouldn't you just show that photographic evidence _and be done with the topic?_
  31.  
  32. Yet people from "Reds Rhetoric" to "VSauce" to "Neil deGrasse Tyson" - _none of these people_ - rely on a photo of the Earth from space and instead employ *ridicule* and mathematical proofs *which cannot be understood by the people they are trying to reach!*
  33.  
  34. A genuine photo of the Earth from space - _one that does not resemble artwork_ - is the *only* way to reach those who don't trust people like "Neil deGrasse Tyson" and cannot properly understand the valid mathematical proofs offered by "Reds Rhetoric".
  35.  
  36. Keep in mind that most "normal people" simply accept the Earth from space photos as "real" (i.e., that they are "realistic") - it does not resemble artwork to them. But why are so many "normal people" perceiving the "Earth from space" photos as real when *upon proper scrutiny* they better resemble artwork? What is happening?
  37.  
  38. The inability to distinguish between reality and fantasy (or in this example - between a real photo and artwork) has been termed "colour blindness" in lie system nomenclature. The lie system *creates* "colour blindness" in the population by routinely presenting imagery that (upon scrutiny) _resembles_ artwork as the real thing.
  39.  
  40. "Normal people" perceive the Earth from space pictures as "real" because like the "fruit in water" artwork I showed they possess enough "realism" (unlike the Moon drawing at the start) and they *trust* the source.
  41.  
  42. When the population *trusts* a source (e.g., "NASA") and the picture is _supposed to be real_ then it can become perceived as real. *If a piece of artwork is perceived as real then it enters the mind as real.*
  43.  
  44. When this happens it distorts the population's perception of reality and prepares it to accept more fake things as real.
  45.  
  46. This presentation did not pass judgement on the Earth from space image. I am not suggesting the Earth from space image is real nor am I suggesting it is fake. Rather - *I am purely pointing out that it better _resembles_ artwork.*
  47.  
  48. Just because a picture _resembles_ artwork does not mean it is fake. It could be fake but not necessarily so. After all - it is very easy to make a real photo resemble artwork (I gave an example of that @ 3m:37s in the presentation titled "HOW YOU CAN KNOW THE EARTH ISN'T FLAT"). On the other hand - it is very difficult to make artwork appear to have the same "realness" of a genuine photo (upon proper scrutiny).
  49.  
  50. Furthermore - _even if_ something is recognised by everyone as artwork it can still be artwork of a real thing. Just because artwork (and _only_ artwork) is provided of/for something does not mean that something isn't real.
  51.  
  52. A person might have only ever seen drawings of you but that does not mean you aren't a real person! The artwork obviously represents a real thing even if _only_ artwork of you exists for certain people.
  53.  
  54. When we are presented with something that resembles artwork (upon scrutiny) we are forced to trust the people who are presenting it to us as real.
  55.  
  56. Imagine a crime has been committed and the culprit has been clearly caught on CCTV. Now imagine the jury was not shown the CCTV footage *but instead a "realistic drawing" from it!*
  57.  
  58. Although the drawing would be of a real thing (of the culprit committing the crime) the jury would now be *forced to trust* whoever provided the drawing that it was indeed of a real thing!
  59.  
  60. Perhaps the drawing is "realistic" and the jury isn't told it is artwork - it can then be the case that the jury is convinced the culprit is guilty *because of a drawing!*
  61.  
  62. Worse - _because_ it is a drawing the trusted artist (or trusted source) could draw _*someone else*_ as the culprit (because a drawing has that freedom) and the jury would then perceive the new person as the culprit! Just so long as the jury trusts the artist/source (and so long as the artwork appears "realistic enough") the jury would perceive fantasy as reality *and* be powerless to doubt (until they lost trust in the source).
  63.  
  64. __
  65.  
  66. To summarise. The inability to distinguish between reality and fantasy has been termed "colour blindness" in lie system nomenclature. When someone looks at a photo of the Earth from space - _but does not recognise that it better resembles artwork_ (i.e., it appears to them just like a real photo - like the Moon) then that person is _experiencing_ this special kind of "colour blindness".
  67.  
  68. Those who are "colour blind" in this way are *vulnerable to wicked manipulation* because the source can then provide "realistic" artwork of *false* things (fantasy) and if the source/artist is trusted (and the context is "real/serious") then it will enter the mind of the "colour blind" person as reality itself.
  69.  
  70. And once something false has entered the mind as real - it unavoidably distorts that person's perception of reality. And so on and so forth - _a real mess that isn't easy to undo!_
  71.  
  72. In this way the lie system is *creating "colour blindness" in the population* which causes fantasy to be perceived as reality (even in astute and intelligent people). The only way to avoid this happening to ourselves is to gain a genuine awareness and understanding of the process involved.
  73.  
  74. This presentation - _with just a *few minutes* to do it_ - was about drawing attention to that _process_ and not about creating any "left/right paradigms".
  75.  
  76. If you managed to read all the way down to here - thank you. I hope my notes have helped.
  77.  
  78.  
  79. ____________________________________________________________
  80. My name is Lesta Nediam and I am cracking reality like a nut.
  81.  
  82. Lesta on YouTube
  83. https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ
  84.  
  85. Lesta on Twitter
  86. https://twitter.com/lestanediam
  87.  
  88. Lesta on Google Plus
  89. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ
  90.  
  91. What does not exist - exists to exist.
  92. What exists - exists to always exist.
  93. As it is written - so it is done.
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement
Public Pastes
Advertisement
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!