API tools faq
paste
Lesta

10 Lesta Nediam LNC2016-02-10 0955 +cabadejo

Lesta
Feb 9th, 2016
74
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 11.65 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Lesta Nediam LNC2016-02-10 0955 +cabadejo
  2. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/QAXN5TZr2Y2
  3. https://pastebin.com/tsCWnG57
  4. lexicon; terms; sham belief; camel-straw claim; camel-straw assertion; lie system representative
  5. __
  6.  
  7.  
  8. +cabadejo __ This is again long but I cover a few things and introduce another term ("camel-straw claim" or "camel-straw assertion") and find another use for "sham belief" (as a false but seductive belief [especially where a lot of time could potentially be wasted either believing it or exploring it]).
  9.  
  10. __
  11.  
  12. To understand this and my reaction you'll need to at least skim over the following few paragraphs. I know it's long.
  13.  
  14. I also ask for your opinion on something at the end.
  15.  
  16.  
  17. Note: I also apologise in advance - I don't have time to read over what I've written [I'm typing quickly as usual] and will do so as I can - if there are any typos, doubled words or stupid phrasing - forgive me.
  18.  
  19.  
  20. __
  21.  
  22. The kind of belief I am talking about (what I am calling a "shadow belief") is something that *can be true.*
  23.  
  24. In fact - the whole point is to get us to believe TRUE THINGS for FALSE REASONS.
  25.  
  26. Whatever can be lied about IS lied about (and so the only exceptions are "self-evident truths").
  27.  
  28. Where *possible* the lie system gives us false reasons to believe (especially when it comes to self-evident truths).
  29.  
  30. As much as possible we are given BS as our *foundation* for a belief.
  31.  
  32. The lie system (and in general: LIARS) constantly make an effort to have us believe and accept things *without* justification.
  33.  
  34. __
  35.  
  36. (Simply dismissing the "masking glitch" as a "satellite glitch" or "broadcasting glitch" is an effort to have us accept something without justification. Without a known good example we are not justified in accepting that explanation and a person who does is doing so because it conforms to their pre-existing belief that the "ISS" is real or their pre-existing belief that "it resembles a satellite glitch" and they do not care enough to find an alternate explanation.)
  37.  
  38. __
  39.  
  40. However - *we are not given sufficient proof for the lie system events and claims.* That's the simple "trick". That is the "common denominator" between lie system claims and events.
  41.  
  42. And that is why the "ISS" proves we live in a lie system *because it is such an extraordinary claim that can be so simply proven yet after fifteen years we have not seen what we need to see to justify a belief in it!*
  43.  
  44. Thus "sufficient proof" *must* be getting intentionally withheld from us!
  45.  
  46. How any "truthers" before me *have not noticed this* is baffling to me and my inclination is to suspect they are either all worthless researchers *or* representatives and agents of the lie system.
  47.  
  48.  
  49. __
  50.  
  51.  
  52. *An aside / distinction:*
  53.  
  54. I think going forward what I call an "agent of the lie system" will be someone who can actually get a drone strike to take a person out or have a hitman take someone out.
  55.  
  56. That is to say - an agent is someone who has *real* agency. That was always the intention but it's clear we are surrounded by people who behave *like* an agent of the lie system but they are not actually lie system agents.
  57.  
  58. I've been calling them "useful idiots" which is okay but I should probably use the term "lie system representative".
  59.  
  60. The reason being that the people we deal with on YouTube - are more "representatives of the lie system" than actual agents.
  61.  
  62. The lie system has *rubbed off* on them - and they have picked up the lie system's traits and characteristics.
  63.  
  64. They create "mini-lie systems" whether or not they realise it's what they're doing.
  65.  
  66.  
  67. *End of aside / distinction.*
  68.  
  69.  
  70. __
  71.  
  72.  
  73. Once a person has been trained to accept (believe) something based on trust (i.e., *"who is saying it"* is what matters) and proof's appearances (i.e., *"the reasons given"* do not in and of themselves necessarily prove the claim/event - i.e., none of the reasons are sufficient proof) that person becomes *dependent* upon the specific *story teller.*
  74.  
  75. (A group of "story tellers" would be a "network of story tellers". Thus we have *"lie system networks".*)
  76.  
  77. *A dependency is formed when a person believes a story teller without reflexively requiring proof (especially sufficient proof).*
  78.  
  79. Dependency becomes formed in people who regularly listen to someone. A new listener may have their guard up and require proof. But over time - a person becomes "accustomed" to the person and since they listen to them then the requirements for proof of claims are lowered.
  80.  
  81. Until something is said that defies belief in that listener.
  82.  
  83. Which leads me to the next point:
  84.  
  85. It allows the story teller to suggest increasingly ludicrous things and it will *always* be believed *until a line is crossed* because the audience has always believed without requiring sufficient proof.
  86.  
  87. When a "story teller" says something that "defies belief" in a listener then it is like a "straw that breaks a camel's back".
  88.  
  89. It is an assertion or claim that "breaks the trust". (And if the person is a liar then it is a lie that breaks the trust.)
  90.  
  91. Once trust is broken then the "spell" or "fascination" can be broken.
  92.  
  93. (You will see people like "BzTruetalk" constantly trying to portray me as a liar but since I tell no lies he needs to twist, distort and misrepresent. The danger is a person unfamiliar to both of us is at risk of believing "Bztruetalk" - at the very least he serves to "poison the well". I mention him because I just saw he had posted another couple of videos about me.)
  94.  
  95. This type of assertion or claim (or lie) would be something that is simply not believed by the listener.
  96.  
  97. The assertion may well be true - but the listener *cannot* believe it as they are hearing it from the speaker. *It is at that moment trust between the two is broken or lost and the listener is now in a position to be able to doubt what the speaker says.*
  98.  
  99. (And will likely see everything that speaker said as being false. Especially if the speaker had a "mini-lie system" and uttered only lies and half-truths and exaggerations.)
  100.  
  101. __
  102.  
  103. For example - a lot of people listened to "Jeff C" (including myself! there was a time when I had left him some positive comments - a lifetime ago!) *up until "TransAsia" happened.*
  104.  
  105. What "Jeff C" had to say about "TransAsia" was simply too unbelievable and the trust he had with many people was broken.
  106.  
  107. *Once that trust was broken it became very easy to see him for the kind of person he is.*
  108.  
  109. And so I'll refer to *that* kind of "assertion or claim" that "defies belief" and "breaks the trust" as being a "camel-straw assertion" or "camel-straw claim".
  110.  
  111. Each liar will at some point risk uttering a "camel-straw lie".
  112.  
  113. ______
  114.  
  115. Okay - I got carried away. On to "sham belief". Which I think is a good term for *something else* but not quite for this.
  116.  
  117. I'll give an example of what I mean by that in a moment.
  118.  
  119. __
  120.  
  121. To the term *"sham belief"* itself as an alternative or replacement for "shadow belief".
  122.  
  123. __
  124.  
  125. *The word "sham" necessarily suggests the belief - despite appearing genuine - is untrue and false.*
  126.  
  127. Whereas I am talking about beliefs that *could be true* - and in many cases probably ARE true.
  128.  
  129. *It is just that we are not justified in believing them for the reasons given.*
  130.  
  131. __
  132.  
  133. Let us suppose the Earth is round. Would we really want to call a belief in a round Earth a "sham belief"?!
  134.  
  135. We are not given sufficient proof for the Earth's shape. *That alone allows us to doubt it* (though it does not follow that because we can doubt the shape that it must be flat).
  136.  
  137. It does not seem appropriate to call every unjustified belief a "sham belief" (I will suggest an alternative use in a moment). Especially when perhaps 97% of our beliefs are unjustified anyway!
  138.  
  139. Example: I believe my car is in the garage is an unjustified belief *because it may have been stolen overnight.* I am confident it has not been stolen but it remains an unjustified belief until I see it where it should be.
  140.  
  141. To think of my belief that my car is in the garage as being a "sham belief" does not seem right to me.
  142.  
  143. As an aside: *Is there some other reason you object to the word "shadow" for "shadow belief"?*
  144.  
  145. For some reason I thought you were okay with that word for this term but I am probably mistaken. (I thought you had once commented that you didn't mind that term? I suppose I had a sham belief about it!)
  146.  
  147. __
  148.  
  149. More seriously: There may indeed be a real and manned "ISS" *the problem is that our belief in it being real and manned is not justified.*
  150.  
  151. If there is sufficient proof for a real and manned "ISS" then I will be the first to accept and believe it.
  152.  
  153. It is just that after a decade and a half what we need to see to justify our belief remains absent *but we would have reasonably expected to have seen it by now* (even if only accidentally).
  154.  
  155.  
  156. __
  157.  
  158. *An alternate suggestion for the term "sham belief":*
  159.  
  160.  
  161. A "sham belief" COULD be referred to as a kind of "trapping belief". (Like laying a snare to catch a rabbit or a bear. Or we call that a "snare belief!" but I think "sham belief" has a much nicer ring to it.)
  162.  
  163. For example - the idea that if "a ship that disappears over the horizon and is brought back into view with a telescope therefore the Earth is not curved" could be a candidate *"sham belief".*
  164.  
  165. A "sham belief" would be a belief that is seductive or intriguing or tempting but is wrong or somehow flawed.
  166.  
  167. After all - "true is true" we must never use the word "true" in association with something that could be false. And so "sham" should be used with things that are false.
  168.  
  169. Of course - something "sham" is purported to be genuine - but it IS false. Something that is "sham" is false and that is the only reason I cannot consider it as a replacement for "shadow belief". Because a shadow belief CAN ALSO be true.
  170.  
  171. Another candidate "sham belief" would be "rockets don't work in space".
  172.  
  173. (Let's just say: if we outright know a belief is false then it is an outright "sham belief" but if we don't know with certainty we would call it a "candidate sham belief" or a "possible sham belief".)
  174.  
  175. *A "sham belief" would be something that a person can spend a significant amount of time on and perhaps never quite resolve.*
  176.  
  177. Whether or not a person believes a "sham belief" it comes down to personal choice. They choose to either accept or reject it.
  178.  
  179. There are people who believe rockets don't work in space *therefore* the Moon landings are fake. There are people who believe "telescopes restore ships into view therefore the Earth is flat.
  180.  
  181. If these things are false - then they are "sham beliefs". If much time can be spent on them without resolution - then they are "candidate sham beliefs".
  182.  
  183. __
  184.  
  185. How do you feel about that? *In that regard I think "sham belief" is appropriate and specific and ideal.*
  186.  
  187. I want to keep "shadow belief" for the reasons I began with. And I don't want to reject "sham belief" because it is suitable for what I have just written.
  188.  
  189. (A kind of "trapping" or "ensnaring" belief - that leads people down a dead-end.)
  190.  
  191. You and I have discussed "rockets in space" and I think that would be a candidate "sham belief".
  192.  
  193. And so anything "tempting but probably false" could also fit under the category of a "sham belief".
  194.  
  195.  
  196.  
  197.  
  198.  
  199. __________________________________________
  200. Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's posts, comments, videos and discussions:
  201. https://pastebin.com/Bfr5RMSg
  202.  
  203. Here is Lesta Nediam's Google Plus posts (i.e., blog) - this is where Lesta is most active:
  204. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ
  205.  
  206. Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's video uploads:
  207. https://pastebin.com/WV42jUb1
  208.  
  209. Here is Lesta Nediam's YouTube channel - for videos about the lie system:
  210. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w
Advertisement
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!