4 Lesta Nediam LNC2018-04-08 1730 +hogan Cauldron

Lesta Nediam LNC2018-04-08 1730 +hogan Cauldron
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufkgjVlVxe8&lc=Ugx23BKyQmZtONb7w0t4AaABAg
https://pastebin.com/w0Q9y4Jf
__

+hogan Cauldron __ To be honest, your opening comment is somewhat puzzling - the final longer paragraph in particular. Perhaps that is why NPS wrote what he did? Could you explain what you wrote or restate it more clearly?

Often I write something to someone thinking I've been clear but all I've done is confuse the other person or they have somehow taken offense to it, etc. Because I'm familiar with you, and consider you to be an ally (I hope), it is worth taking the time to clear things up with you.

The $5 filter is certainly a way to filter out noise, but it is also a way to filter out genuine criticism, too. By "genuine criticism" I don't mean senseless attacks (e.g., "you're a liar!", "you're a hypocrite!") but questions and ideas that lead everyone closer to the truth. For example, I asked "John le Bon" how he distinguishes between a meaningful coincidence and one that isn't. Thus far he has done everything except answer the question and has not even had a go at it.

If you are able to see what is hidden behind JLB's paywall (I'm not a member of his site): Has anyone else asked how "JLB" distinguishes between a meaningful/valid coincidence and one that isn't (i.e., something that is purely random/accidental)?

For example, in his recent video "JLB" flipped a "SUPERTRAMP" album cover to get "9/11". Wouldn't you agree that many pieces of artwork over the past 50 years could be flipped about and rearranged to show something that seems to relate to "9/11"? (So it's hardly surprising it can be done in the first place.)

Does that mean it's always relevant, though? If it's not always relevant, then how do you know when it isn't? For example, if a random kid, let's say a budding architect, drew the WTC and wrote "SUPER SKYSCRAPER!" at the top the same effect could be achieved if it too were flipped. Would that be a meaningful "synchronicity" or just an accidental coincidence?

Another way to understand what I'm asking is to think about the people who take a name or a keyword from a news article and run it through a nutty calculator (e.g., a gematria calculator). If the person gets a nutty "33" or a nutty "666", then that seems to be highly-prized. But the reality is that many words and names will add up to those numbers. Including within many completely innocent articles. So how does one know when a name/keyword is deliberately used to give "33" or when it is purely accidental?

Knowing when something is meaningful and when it is not is very important. If you don't know how to rule something out, then all you end up doing is ruling things in according to your feelings - your pre-existing belief bias. I.e., things that feel relevant (but might not be!) will be included while things that don't feel relevant (but might be!) will be ignored.

It should be obvious that is a terrible way of going about things and it unavoidably opens you up to making a large number of mistakes. That was the motivation behind asking "JLB" what I did. Since he is someone who has positioned himself to tell other people things (and potentially receive money for it), then he has a duty of care to get things right and not mislead his audience.

Who knows what _slightly incorrect_ things he may have said about me behind his paywall - I can't see it and have no way of correcting it. That is why I prefer to do everything out in the open/public so that anyone can approach me with a question or a correction.

But that becomes impossible when the other person either won't answer pertinent questions or hides my own relevant replies in a discussion. When that starts to happen I simply cannot recommend anyone who does that - no matter how much I might find them talented and charming.

By suggesting that NPS "parrots" do you mean because he echoes many things that are similar to me? Is that what makes him a "parrot"? For the past couple of years I've been pointing out a very simple perceptual magic trick. It is very simple and obvious once you can see and understand it. And so of course NPS is going to sound like me - as would you or anyone who can also see what's happening.

The worrying thing is that a lot of people are now aware that "sufficient proof" is being systematically and intentionally withheld and obscured (and the implications of this), but only a very few people seem to have genuinely caught on. Anyone who does catch on is going to sound like me (and seem like a "parrot") because what I'm pointing out is very simple and common.

What I am pointing out is also what makes all the other conspiracies people talk about seem possible in the first place, but few are willing to give up that mind blow to pursue the "lie system"!

Or did you call NPS a "parrot" as a joke because you effectively repeated/parroted what he wrote (your sentence was virtually identical)?

Like I say, some explanation/clarification would be helpful. If anything I have written has not made sense or confused you let me know and I'll try to explain it better. If you have somehow been turned against me or NPS, then I'm sorry it has happened. In that case can you at least tell me what has caused you to turn against me? You had seemed like an ally until now so I hope I'm just mistaken and that this is a misunderstanding.

P.S. I don't think NPS was trying to insult or attack you but I can see how it could have come across that way. But honestly, some of what you wrote was a bit ambiguous. I'm not blaming you for it hence I've taken the time to write a detailed reply and any explanation you can give would be appreciated.

You are always welcome to message me on Google Plus or Twitter if you have a question/concern. Just be patient if I am slow to respond as I have a lot going on in my day-to-day life at the moment (but I'll aim to acknowledge your message quickly).


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

Lesta on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ

Lesta on Twitter
https://twitter.com/lestanediam

Lesta on Google Plus
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

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