20 Lesta Nediam LNC2017-03-30 0655 +nationalparksign

Lesta Nediam LNC2017-03-30 0655 +nationalparksign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcePMv0dXSY&lc=z12gznqrqtucgdtb504cczaovlfaungwxp40k
https://pastebin.com/VPXMhqDa
__

This is a good example that illustrates the specialised lie system concept of *"sufficient proof"* being *intentionally withheld* because it is neutral and shouldn't evoke a strong or biased emotional response (making it easier to focus on and understand the "trick" that's taking place).

Another good example of "sufficient proof" being intentionally withheld was the alleged breaking of the world record for "breath holding" by stage magician "David Blaine" (on April 30th, 2008). Footage of that 17m:4s stunt can be found at the following 8m:6s video (the time discrepancies alone should hint at its problems!): watch?v=olKlc4Bv6CA

On the 28th of February 2016 the world record for breath holding was broken by "Aleix Segura" and footage of it was posted to YouTube. That footage contains no glaring glitches, clever cuts, sneaky edits or misdirecting pans. It undeniably *qualifies* as genuine *"sufficient proof".* It also contained multiple uninterrupted camera angles.

If you wanted to prove something in a way that cannot be doubted and denied by reasonable people then that is precisely how you would film and present it. That gem of "sufficient proof" can be found here: watch?v=Ks3oUjsCxao


__
[A NECESSARY NOTE]

There are some skeptics who reject *all* video footage on the grounds that it is just "pixels on a screen" which can be faked. While that is true (and becoming increasingly true for everyday people) this tempting criticism does not stand up to scrutiny.

While this response to the video is not a suitable place to properly address the criticism I should mention a few things. In brief - a camera's sole purpose *is to reliably capture reality as it really was*. And so if is it not reasonable to doubt that a camera's footage is genuine - we must *trust the footage* else we are being unreasonable. Else we are being *self-defeatingly absurd.*

We must trust *something* _if only that we are *not* a butterfly having an elaborate and most convincing dream!_

This is why - if we are to reject footage it must *not* be on the grounds of it being "footage" ("mere pixels on a screen that can easily be faked") *but on the grounds that it contains glitches, cuts, edits and pans.* I.e., *potential editing points.*

Furthermore - those who say that we cannot trust footage because it is just "pixels on a screen" are overlooking the fact that - *_certainly according to those skeptics_* - the lie system could easily fake "sufficient proof". After all - it's just pixels on a screen! But yet it doesn't! And that's because withholding "sufficient proof" is what's important. Faking "sufficient proof" only undermines the trust voodoo of the lie system.

Again - if a person cannot rule out that they might be a butterfly having an elaborate dream (or something similar) then they cannot be reasoned with - no matter how reasonable they may otherwise sound or seem. Such a skeptical person will look at footage they themselves filmed earlier in the day and panic, "But what if this is fake?! What if someone has replaced my footage with something similar?!" _It's absurd._

If we want to scrutinise events and have opinions about them then we must not ever cling to such absurdities.

[END OF NOTE]
__


A "normal person" can be expected to respond with: _"So what? The cuts are there to make the footage more interesting. Of course it really happened. It is absurd to think it didn't!"_ And that is precisely the *trained response* we can expect from a population that has been routinely exposed to this propaganda strategy since birth.

When the time comes for the lie system to stage an event it can be presented to the audience in the same form a lie would need to take - *and it will be perceived as truth by the audience.* Just as the _cut to pieces_ footage of the quite possibly real "Spelling Bee" and of the "David Blaine" breath holding attempt are perceived as real by the population. Unhesitatingly and unquestioningly accepted as truth - except by the most paranoid and least trusting of audience members.

When enough people have caught on to this simple *perceptual magic trick* - and are describing it and pointing out examples of it (like has been done in this video) without embellishing it, exaggerating it or twisting it to have a meaning or conclusion that cannot be derived will we have ruined the magic trick for the lie system's magicians. Only then.

And until then every so-called "truther" is wasting his or her time by missing the point and - _at best only unintentionally_ - is misdirecting their audience.

Nothing can change in a meaningful way until there are more who are posting videos like this one that demonstrate they genuinely recognise the concept of sufficient proof being withheld *all around them* - and understand its special *significance and implications* - _without using this verifiable observation to mislead and take advantage of others._

This presentation is in keeping with true things for true reasons - *excellent!*


______________________________________________________________
My name is Lesta Nediam and I am cracking reality like a nut.

Lesta Nediam's YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ

Lesta Nediam's Google Plus:
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

Lesta Nediam's Official Blog:
https://lestanediam.blogspot.com.au

Lesta Nediam's Twitter:
https://twitter.com/LestaNediam

Lesta Nediam's Disqus:
https://disqus.com/home/forum/lestanediam/

Lesta Nediam's Archived Public Comments:
https://pastebin.com/u/Lesta


What does not exist - exists to exist.
What exists - exists to always exist.
As it is written - so it is done.