16 Lesta Nediam LNC2016-04-02 1645 +The Color Out of Space

Lesta Nediam LNC2016-04-02 1645 +The Color Out of Space
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/WdxFdM7cxFn
https://pastebin.com/xpzEcWBm
__


+The Color Out of Space __ The reason I am asking for "10 minutes" is not because I think that is the "limitation" but rather to get people to realise that all of the footage purportedly from the "ISS" *has problems that make it doubtable to intelligent people.*



(The key point is that what we are shown at all times remains doubtable to intelligent people.)



The problem is that some (or many!) people reason as follows:



*"The longest zero gravity flight is about 30 seconds - therefore to see just one minute of zero gravity would be impossible - therefore the ISS must be real".*



I came across that kind of reasoning a lot last year. It is worthless reasoning for a number of reasons.



1. It could be that the footage we're seeing is being somehow slowed down to stretch out the duration.



2. It could be that longer than "30 seconds" can be achieved. If a minute can be achieved and no one knows it - then you can convince all of those people there is a real and manned "ISS" by showing just one minute that's achieved with a plane!



3. It could be that the footage we are seeing has been cleverly stitched together. That would be from "clever cuts", "misdirecting pans" and where the person remains on screen - by way of "masking glitches" [where the join is noticeable].



And of course - it can be some combination of the above. Which - if it is being faked - would be the case (and if it is not being faked then the glitches are being artificially added for reasons I'll go into in a moment).



__



I was originally going to go with a figure of "5 minutes" but there are periods of *about* five minutes where the glitches are too subtle for stupid and unobservant people to notice.



From experience there is at least one *major* "masking glitch" within every ten minute segment of purported zero gravity.



Certainly, I've never seen more than 5 or 6 minutes where I couldn't identify a *"potential editing point".* (Note: other "potential editing points" include "zooming in" and "fast forwarding" the footage - these both permit opportunities to cleverly join the footage.)



If I were to insist on seeing 5 minutes and someone pointed out footage that had only imperceptible glitches/problems then silly people would have started dancing about "Lesta is wrong Lesta is wrong!" as though having six minutes of glitch free footage from the "ISS" is something to be proud of when that should be the case with all of its hundreds to thousands of long videos.



(There is a "Cady Coleman" video which is frequently cited as "proof of something" where there is about 6 or 7 minutes of seemingly straight footage but within that period of time the camera zooms right in which allows for a potential editing point. Again - it is not point and say "look! that was an edit right there!" it is that it makes the footage doubtable - it is not "qualifying footage" in terms of "sufficient proof".)



__



I am also not suggesting that "10 minutes of zero gravity" is what "they" can achieve.



What the genuine "maximum" period of zero gravity that can be achieved happens to be - I don't know - but then again none of us do. At best we might be able to come up with "theoretical limits" but we don't know what the practical maximum is.



Everyone knows "zero gravity flights" can give "25 to 30 seconds" but that is just for wealthy joy ride flights. *I am sure the world's most powerful military can achieve longer than 30 seconds.* It might only be 45 seconds to one minute - who can say - but if "normal people" believe it's 30 seconds and they are shown 50 seconds - then in their mind the "ISS" has been "proven" which is a mistake.



Whatever the maximum amount is it will likely be somewhat longer than what the "average belief controlled person" will believe.



So by talking about "10 minutes" that's what I am trying to overcome while drawing people's attention to the fact that *NASA and their purported BILLIONS cannot even give us 10 minutes of glitch-free footage.*



__



There are three primary reasons for the glitches we see.



1) They are necessary in order to cleverly stitch briefer segments together. Some of the joins might be "perfect" but others might not - where the joins are not the "masking glitch" can be applied which is made to resemble a standard broadcasting/signal glitch.



2) They are NOT necessary because the "ISS is real". Therefore we are seeing the glitches NOT because they cannot give us glitch-free footage but in order to keep what we see *doubtable* by intelligent people.



3) The "ISS" is real but despite their billions "they" cannot broadcast to us without being plagued by "glitches". (To me that seems ABSURD! Therefore - the correct answer is likely one of the other two.)



__



(Stupid, unobservant and mentally ill people will believe whatever they want to believe. And it does not ever matter about their opinion/analysis!)



As I say - reason the footage would be "crippled" is to keep it doubtable. If the "ISS" footage is being faked then there is no reason to think they would try it UNLESS they could make "glitch-free footage". So the fact we see glitches is in my view intentional. It can be noted that you won't find the glitches (not the "masking glitches" I am talking about) in "known good footage". I am suggesting that they are added intentionally.



Of course - not every masking glitch need represent an actual editing point. Only that if it is being faked then some of them necessarily would. Some of the glitches would be added where it is not needed so that if a person were to examine them they would find nothing. (Also - if you knew the "time limit" for their zero gravity then you could perhaps know which glitches likely contained a masking edit but that's beyond the scope of this reply.)



__



After 15+ years we have a reasonable expectation to have by now seen 10 minutes of clean footage. We would also have expected to see a mere 3 minutes of somersaults or anything else along those lines! (Such a thing could be faked but would be magnitudes more difficult - and by never showing it to us we do not have an expectation of seeing it.)



Since we do not ever see those things we can reasonably conclude that it is all intentional. We can know that what I am saying about the lie system is accurate because it gives us predictive power with regard to the things we see (i.e., if it can never show us "sufficient proof" then we can expect to see "proof's appearances" which is what we always get).



We are *intentionally* being withheld what we need to see. *This FORCES US to use our imagination to "fill in the blanks".*



That's what it is all about. Encouraging us to use our imagination to fill in the blanks. *Truth becomes whatever we can imagine it to be.*



And what we imagine to be the case influences our beliefs and how we respond to what we see (and reality).



For example: imagine a person watching "ISS" footage but does not believe it's real. Because they see 30 minute interviews they conclude it must be somehow faked by using "green screen" or "harnesses".



But each of these things are a misdirection. "NASA" want people to think it is X when really it is Y (in this case "Y" could be "real" or just "stitching together zero gravity flights" - "Y" is NOT green-screen or harnesses).



I am probably being confusing. The lie system as much as possible wants people to believe the wrong things. If no green-screen is used - then the footage might be tweaked in such a way so as to give a "green screen" feel/appearance to it. If a person rejecting the "ISS" is crying "green screen!" but that's NOT what is happening - then that person is no threat to the lie system and becomes ridiculed by their peers.



__



With all events and claims the lie system encourages each of us in the audience to arrive at a conclusion for themselves.



(Because we are not shown "sufficient proof" it is 50/50 that something could be real or fake - *our response should be NEUTRAL*.) IF a person in the audience decides something is REAL (which for the "ISS" is the "prevailing belief") then they will invent "plausible explanations" for each oddity/anomaly that they become aware of - each limited only by their natural intelligence and imagination (and always such that it conforms to their belief bias).



For example - if they believe it is real then the glitches become "broadcasting glitches" - problem solved!



The "lie system" which I am trying to describe to people *withholds sufficient proof with every event and claim.* That is its chief strategy. It is remarkably simple. This one sneaky little thing can have profound consequences on the population. It controls the population's beliefs which in turn control the population's behaviour which in turn makes our farmers happy.



There could be REAL events happening (the "ISS" could be real! The "Brussels Bombing" could be real!) *but what we're shown from it is "crippled" in such a way that it remains doubtable to intelligent people.*



(I cannot stress that enough: at all times it must be doubtable to *intelligent* people - the opinion of stupid, unobservant and mentally ill folk does not matter to the process that is happening.)



This way the audience "figures out" what THEY want to believe. Typically this is what they can IMAGINE to be true/real.



And so a "conspiracy theorist" has no difficulty imagining a "fake event" that has been carried out by "actors" (that is not quite how I perceive these events - in Lesta's lie system these are potentially fabricated events which have "participants" - who are more like the events organisers than just lowly hired hands).



But a "normal person" cannot possibly imagine such a thing. A normal person gets stuck on an obstacle ("a belief hurdle they can't get over") such as "but that would require a whole lot of people keeping a secret and humans cannot keep secrets for very long - therefore that is nonsense!".



That is to say - they apply their natural intelligence to invent a "plausible explanation" as to why it *cannot* be a "fake event" whereas the "conspiracy theorist" does the opposite.



As genuine dissidents in a lie system our task is to remain neutral at all times because we are being encouraged to form a belief - but any belief we form is just an expression of our belief bias.



It must be remembered at all times: *what we need to see to know with certainty is absent.* We are simply not shown sufficient proof (such as "genuine gore" or "believable witnesses" or "footage from the event that necessarily proves it happened").



The absence of sufficient proof does not mean an event or claim is necessarily false. Only that it COULD be! (It is my personal opinion that the "ISS" is BS but I cannot assert this as a fact about reality because what I need to see/know to be correct is missing.)



At all times what we are shown is doubtable to intelligent people.



The same goes for the "ISS". That is why I am using the (somewhat arbitrary) figure of 10 minutes. *Certainly "normal people" should expect there to exist 10 minutes of footage.*



Certainly - we should expect (one hopes) that a "normal person" can realise there is a problem if there doesn't exist ten minutes of genuine "ISS" footage!



A "normal person" should be able to stop and think: "hang on - after 15 years - how can it be we have only footage filled with glitches, cuts, edits and pans?!"



IF it is being faked we cannot know the actual parameters/limitations (i.e., how long "zero gravity" can really be achieved for). We are left to SPECULATE. We are always invited to speculate! And if we speculate without brakes then we end up lost in fantasy! (That is why my core tenet is: "true things for true reasons" for it is the only reliable way to arrive at the truth - it is how we can avoid succumbing to unchecked paranoia and fantasy.)



If we end up believing something is fake (a belief bias is formed despite it being 50/50) - then we become prone to noticing details and *interpreting them according to our belief bias.* We "translate reality" such that it conforms to our belief bias.



As genuine dissidents we must be mindful of this and at all costs avoid it happening to ourselves and to others around us.



Anyway - that will do for now.



__________________________________________
Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's posts, comments, videos and discussions:
https://pastebin.com/Bfr5RMSg

Here is Lesta Nediam's Google Plus posts (i.e., blog) - this is where Lesta is most active:
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's video uploads:
https://pastebin.com/WV42jUb1

Here is Lesta Nediam's YouTube channel - for videos about the lie system:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w