This feed URL is no longer valid. Visit this page to find the new URL, if you have access: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=157259387630213">https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=157259387630213</a>
Mr. Aldous Huxley in 1961 giving a lecture on language.
The post Aldous Huxley on human thought and expression (lecture on language) appeared first on disinformation.
Imagine this: a prison system that actually wants to turn its inmates into better people. As unlikely as that might seem in a world where the prison-industrial complex is spreading its dark shadow worldwide, in Brazil one prison is actually trying to send back prisoners to society as improved people by treating them with ayahuasca (for more information on ayahuasca review our archive). The New York Times reports from:
JI-PARANÁ, Brazil — As the night sky enveloped this outpost in Brazil’s Amazon basin, the ceremony at the open-air temple began simply enough.
Dozens of adults and children, all clad in white, stood in a line. A holy man handed each a cup of ayahuasca, a muddy-looking hallucinogenic brew. They gulped it down; some vomited. Hymns were sung. More ayahuasca was consumed. By midnight, the congregants seemed strangely energized. Then the dancing began.
Such rituals are a fixture across the Amazon, where ayahuasca has been consumed for centuries and entire religions have coalesced around the psychedelic concoction. But the ceremony one night this month was different: Among those imbibing from the holy man’s decanter were prison inmates, convicted of crimes such as murder, kidnapping and rape.
“I’m finally realizing I was on the wrong path in this life,” said Celmiro de Almeida, 36, who is serving a sentence for homicide at a prison four hours away on a road that winds through the jungle. “Each experience helps me communicate with my victim to beg for forgiveness,” said Mr. de Almeida, who has taken ayahuasca nearly 20 times at the sanctuary here.
The provision of a hallucinogen to inmates on short furloughs in the middle of the rain forest reflects a continuing quest for ways to ease pressure on Brazil’s prison system. The country’s inmate population has doubled since the start of the century to more than 550,000, straining underfunded prisons rife with human rights violations and violent uprisings complete with beheadings.
One of the bloodiest prison revolts in recent decades took place in the nearby city of Pôrto Velho, in 2002, when at least 27 inmates were killed at the Urso Branco prison. Around the same time, Acuda, a pioneering prisoners’ rights group in Pôrto Velho, began offering inmates therapy sessions in yoga, meditation and Reiki, a healing ritual directing energy from the practitioner’s hands to a patient’s body.
Two years ago, the volunteer therapists at Acuda had a new idea: Why not give the inmates ayahuasca as well? The Amazonian brew, which is generally madeby blending and boiling a vine (Banisteriopsis caapi) with a leaf (Psychotria viridis), is growing in popularity in Brazil, the United States and other countries.
Acuda had trouble finding a place where the inmates could drink ayahuasca, but they were finally accepted by an offshoot here of Santo Daime, a Brazilian religion founded in the 1930s that blends Catholicism, African traditions and the trance communications with spirits popularized in the 19th century by a Frenchman known as Allan Kardec…
[continues at the New York Times]
The post Inmates Drink Ayahuasca As Therapy In Brazilian Prison appeared first on disinformation.
Neil Moore, a convicted fraudster in Wandsworth prison, used an illicit cell phone to concoct an email with bail instructions. Moore, 28, sent the email to prison staff who released him on March 10, 2015. Authorities didn’t realize what had happened until they went to interview him three days later. Moore, from Ilford, East London, eventually turned himself in.
He then emailed the prison’s custody inbox with instructions for his release.
The court heard Moore registered the bogus website in the name of investigating officer Det Insp Chris Soole, giving the address and contact details for the Royal Courts of Justice.
Prosecutor Ian Paton said: “A lot of criminal ingenuity harbours in the mind of Mr Moore. The case is one of extraordinary criminal inventiveness, deviousness and creativity, all apparently the developed expertise of this defendant”.
The judge, Recorder David Hunt QC, described the behaviour as “ingenious” criminality.
Moore had previously used four different aliases to commit fraud worth £1,819,000 in total.
The post Prisoner Escapes Prison After Sending Fake Bail Email appeared first on disinformation.
Jason Silva talks with Jamie Wheal (Executive Director of the Flow Genome Project) about “flow states” and human potential.
The post Harnessing the Limits of Human Possibility | Jason Silva and Jamie Wheal appeared first on disinformation.
Some news organizations have identified Dr. Moore as a lobbyist for Monsanto. However, Monsanto has come forward with the following claim:
Dr. Moore is not a Monsanto lobbyist or employee. Knowledgeable scientists, consumers and our farmer customers may be familiar with and confident in the safety of glyphosate, but their statements don’t make them lobbyists for our company. Dr. Patrick Moore is one of those individuals. He agrees with the science that supports the safety of glyphosate, and is an advocate for technology and innovation. But as I mentioned, he is not and never has been a paid lobbyist for or employee at Monsanto.
[UPDATE] Dr. Moore has released a statement regarding the above video:
This latest attempt (link 1 below) is just another example of a distraction from people that would rather attack the person than discuss the science.
So lets talk about what really happened:
For many years, my opponents have claimed that I am a paid lobbyist for GMO seed companies, in particular Monsanto. This is a technique used to avoid debating the science that proves Golden Rice and GM foods are safe. Monsanto has now issued a statement that I have never been employed by them (link 2 below) so I will no longer have to put up with that lie. Personally, I admire Monsanto’s leadership in improving many crop varieties, through both conventional breeding and transgenic breeding.
Unfortunately, I accidentally gave my opponents another distraction to use while being interviewed on French TV a few months back. I was extremely upset with this interviewer as he lured me to an interview under false pretences. It was meant to be an interview on Golden Rice and he pulled a stunt on me. The video has since been cleverly edited to distort my actual opinions on the subjects discussed.
I did not intend to say that glyphosate was “safe” to drink, it is not intended for consumption. My point was that in almost all cases it is non-lethal to drink in large quantities and therefore ‘safe’ in the manner that it is used in farming worldwide.
I conduct hundreds of live interviews each year and this is not the first time I have made a mistake under the pressure of a live interview and probably won’t be the last. Only those who put themselves in this situation would understand how difficult it is to do a live interview with a hostile host.
I had stated in a previous interview that glyphosate was safe to use in agriculture and mentioned that it has such low toxicity that drinking a large quantity of it at the concentrations used in farming would not cause permanent damage to humans. In the middle of the interview now being circulated, the interviewer abruptly changed the subject to glyphosate and asked if I would drink a glass of it on camera. I blew up at him because clearly only a fool would drink an unknown substance offered by a hostile stranger live on camera. I had never said I would drink glyphosate in the first place, only that nearly all the people who have tried to commit suicide by drinking it have failed. And they were drinking concentrations of glyphosate far higher than those used as a spray to control weeds. Glyphosate is sold as a concentrate and is typically diluted to 1- 2% with water before it is applied.
There is no scientific evidence that if glyphosate is used as directed by manufacturers, that it can cause cancer. The World Health Organization have done a disservice to science by stating that glyphosate “probably causes cancer”. The studies they chose to base their finding on were not based on the quantities used in modern agriculture. The WHO also categorizes ‘coffee’, ‘pickled vegetables’ and ‘mobile phones’ as possibly carcinogenic! On the scale used by professional toxicologists, glyphosate is less toxic than table salt and vinegar. In fact, if you would like to make at home a spray more toxic to weeds than ‘Glyphosate’ then a mixture of vinegar, salt and dishwashing detergent would suffice.
Read the rest of his statement here.
h/t Boing Boing.
The post Ecologist Claims Monsanto’s Glyphosate is Safe to Drink, Refuses to Drink It appeared first on disinformation.
If you’re an anxious flyer, TSA agents may peg you as a terrorist. How’s that for easing up your anxiety?
The Intercept has come upon some Transportation Security Administration documents called the “SPOT [Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques] Referral Report.” The documents aren’t classified, but have not been previously released. Everything from excessive yawning to wringing of hands to gazing down can lead to suspicion.
Jana Winter and Cora Currier write at The Intercept:
A TSA spokesperson declined to comment on the criteria obtained by The Intercept. “Behavior detection, which is just one element of the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) efforts to mitigate threats against the traveling public, is vital to TSA’s layered approach to deter, detect and disrupt individuals who pose a threat to aviation,” a spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
Since its introduction in 2007, the SPOT program has attracted controversy for the lack of science supporting it. In 2013, the Government Accountability Office found that there was no evidence to back up the idea that “behavioral indicators … can be used to identify persons who may pose a risk to aviation security.” After analyzing hundreds of scientific studies, the GAO concluded that “the human ability to accurately identify deceptive behavior based on behavioral indicators is the same as or slightly better than chance.”
The inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security found in 2013 that TSA had failed to evaluate SPOT, and “cannot ensure that passengers at United States airports are screened objectively, show that the program is cost-effective, or reasonably justify the program’s expansion.”
View the documents here.
Close Your Eyes (And Count To Fuck) by Run The Jewels feat. Zack de la Rocha. Directed by A.G. Rojas
“When Run The Jewels sent me this track, I knew we had the opportunity to create a film that means something. I felt a sense of responsibility to do just that. We had to exploit the lyrics and aggression and emotion of the track, and translate that into a film that would ignite a valuable and productive conversation about racially motivated violence in this country. It’s provocative, and we all knew this, so we were tasked with making something that expressed the intensity of senseless violence without eclipsing our humanity. For me, it was important to write a story that didn’t paint a simplistic portrait of the characters of the Cop and Kid. They’re not stereotypes. They’re people – complex, real people and, as such, the power had to shift between them at certain points throughout the story. The film begins and it feels like they have been fighting for days, they’re exhausted, not a single punch is thrown, their violence is communicated through clumsy, raw emotion. They’ve already fought their way past their judgments and learned hatred toward one another. Our goal was to highlight the futility of the violence, not celebrate it.”
El-P of Run the Jewels: “This is a vision of a seemingly never-ending struggle whose participants are pitted against each other by forces originating outside of themselves.”
Adds partner Killer Mike, “this video represents the futile and exhausting existence of a purgatory-like law enforcement system. There is no neat solution at the end because there is no neat solution in the real world. However, there is an opportunity to dialogue and change the way communities are policed in this country. Salutes to AG Rojas for his unique take on the subject matter and to Shea and Keith for giving us their all and bringing it to life.”
The post Run The Jewels: Close Your Eyes (And Count To Fuck) appeared first on disinformation.
This was originally published on Tantric Disposition Matrix.
I sat down with Robert Guffey, author of Chameleo published by OR Books, for a riveting interview.
John Hawkins: Chameleo read like it would make for a brilliant screenplay. The whole thing came to life. I felt like I was reading a mash of Hunter S. Thompson, Philip K. Dick, but also a bit of Elmore Leonard, with the slick characterizations. The first third is extremely entertaining, but later you bring together a lot of threads – verbatim interviews, emails and phone call transcripts, all of which makes for an interesting combination of humor mixed with striking, frightening stuff.
RG: Yes, the first third is very narrative driven and then I get into the transcripts. I can see where the narrative might slow down some at that point. But I was hoping that at that point the reader would be interested enough to get to the end. And I wanted to maintain the transcript just so the reader could see that this was not just something I was making up. I very much didn’t want to be preaching or standing on a soapbox warning people about the coming apocalypse of the surveillance state. People tend not to listen to that and they tune it out.
JH: What influenced the structural choices you made in putting the book together?
RG: When I was 18, I discovered Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. And around that same time, I discovered a book called AIDS, Inc by Jon Rappoport, which is a very hard-hitting investigative journalism look into alternative theories regarding the origin of AIDS. Was AIDS from a government laboratory, etc. It examines all the theories. I remember thinking it would be fascinating if you could combine the serious investigative journalistic tone of AIDS, Inc with this kind of crazy Gonzo narrative thing, like in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and I think Chameleo is a culmination of that interest on my part.
JH: A lot of otherwise open-mined readers might be repelled by your background in conspiracy theories, and yet, in Chameleo that tenuous narrative trope seems to be supported by the raw events unfolding in a kind of hyper reality. How is Chameleo different from other conspiracy-centric narratives?
RG: When conspiracy theorists publish–or, more often than not, self-publish–books, they are frantically attempting to disseminate what they feel is important, life-or-death information. This is not my main concern. I’m coming from a literature background. I’ve been publishing short stories since I was 25. Writers like John Fante, Henry Miller, and Charles Bukowski wrote about the reality around them. I’m engaged in the same process. It just so happens that the reality we live in today is overbrimming with conspiracies. If Mark Twain were alive today, I’m certain he would be writing about conspiracies. He wouldn’t be able to avoid it. I see Chameleo, primarily, as a work of literature. If the book does succeed in disseminating valuable information, it’s simply a byproduct of my desire to write about reality as I see it.
JH: Your book, especially early on, has a Gonzo journalist flavor added to the stir fry approach, which is in keeping with words attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.” This would seem to apply to the whole concept of your book. Care to elaborate on how?
RG: Actually, it was Joseph Heller who wrote, “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.” That line is from Catch-22. I don’t have much to add to Heller’s statement except to say that I agree with it. When Chameleo begins, I don’t think Dion is paranoid at all; however, being constantly surveilled and harassed does tend to push people over the edge just a bit. I don’t think Dion has ever been clinically paranoid, but the events that were swirling around him might have induced symptoms that could be interpreted as paranoia by those not familiar with the full details of his dilemma. After all, exhibiting paranoiac symptoms is a perfectly reasonable response to being stalked by an organized group of strangers.
JH: We live in times when government is becoming more opaque in its processes, while, at the same time, the human self seems to be disappearing with the rapid evaporation of privacy and free-thought. It occurred to me that what Dion goes through in Chameleo brought this out with great effect.
RG: This process was predicted by Marshall McLuhan. All of his books, in their own unique way, explore how to maintain one’s private citadel of consciousness in a world ruled by The Machines. McLuhan predicted this situation as early as 1946 or ’47. Here’s a quote from McLuhan: “I once wrote an article, ‘The Southern Quality,’ back in 1946 or 1947 where I explained why there was no human life on this planet. Since then human beings have been grown inside programmed media-environments that are essentially like test tubes. That’s why I say the kids today live mythically.” This “mythic” environment is one of the main subjects of a book I’m finishing now. The book is called Hollywood Haunts the World. The final chapter of this book will explore the “loss of self” you refer to.
JH: You mention that you were inspired by the humorous skepticism of Hunter S. Thompson’s Gonzo journalism, but also by Jon Rappoport’s book, AIDS, Inc. Can you say more about how AIDS, Inc acted as an inspiration – or, in other words, what was Rappoport’s thesis and how did his methods and findings inspire your Chameleo approach?
RG: Rappoport is a Pulitzer-Prize-nominated journalist whose approach to documenting the true nature of the 1980s AIDS epidemic was unlike any other reporter at that time. He asked questions no one else even thought to ask. The field of journalism will always be far too limiting for a searching mind like that. In fact, I think it would be incorrect to refer to Rappoport as strictly a “journalist.” He’s a journalist in the same way that Mark Twain was a journalist. He’s a writer who has his eyes wide open, and he simply reports on what he sees. In a sense, one might say that Rappoport’s style of reporting is a more sophisticated and spiritual version of Hunter S. Thompson’s subjective, drug-fueled reportage. Rappoport’s later book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies, is even better than AIDS, Inc. I consider it to be a vastly underappreciated book, one of the best memoirs I’ve ever read. Everyone should read it and meditate on its central message. You might also want to check out Rappoport’s blog. [https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/]
JH: How would you sum up Project Chameleo?
RG: Project Chameleo is the brainchild of a scientist named Richard Schowengerdt, and resulted in the creation of Electro-Optical Camouflage that could be employed by soldiers in the battlefield. Schowengerdt’s findings were almost certainly stolen by a private corporation working in tandem with the U.S. military.
JH: Richard Schowengerdt comes across in your book like the fictional nutty scientist in Back to the Future, or the very real Edward Teller, a kind of futuristic genius, but also the stereotypical naif whose scientific inventions and forward-thinking get co-opted or stolen by government agencies with hidden agendas. I suppose Tim Berners-Lee is another. How do these comparisons work inChameleo, if at all?
JH: I can’t recall a work that featured cameos by so many secret or covert agencies. There’s NCIS and CAIS and Freemasons and group stalkers and the CIA, all immersed in what you might call the sub-primal juices of the Deep State or the Deep Net. But one also thinks of all the other groups out there – the NSA, KKK, Skull and Bones, the PNAC mob, on and on it goes, until you get the sense that our society, which is supposedly built on late Enlightenment principles, falls back rather readily into the occult, fundamental religiosity, the weird and bizarre. And then you look to science for antidotes, it instead exacerbates the problem with references to quantum theory, multiverses, and the Singularity. This seems to play into a central theme of Chameleo – the contemporary fragility of the self and the reality we collectively construct ourselves within. What do you reckon?
RG: The title Chameleo has multiple layers of meaning. On a literal level, of course, it’s referring to Schowengerdt’s attempts to create invisibility technology. On a higher level, it refers to the fact that Truth itself is often camouflaged–not only in the book, but in contemporary life. Politicians and priests and psychiatrists attempt to camouflage Truth every day. We camouflage Truth from ourselves, as well as from others, just to get through an average afternoon. But because Truth is hidden, we have to try to find it ourselves somehow. Occult organizations have been formed for this exact purpose since civilization began. Secret societies are certainly nothing new. You used the word “occult” in your question, and the word “occult” simply means “hidden.” The Freemasons, the Rosicrucians, and similar organizations have been delving for hidden truths since their inception. It has been argued by Robert Lomas in his book, Freemasonry and the Birth of Modern Science, that “Freemasonry, supported by Charles II, was the guiding force behind the birth of modern science.” In the 1600s many scientists were forced to form secret societies, such as the “Invisible College,” in order to study the secrets of nature in ways that were forbidden by the Church. If one feels the need to form a secret society to pursue Truth, due to the fact that the climate of the day is hostile to Truth, then so be it. All organizations are made up of people. A group of Imagination Vampires will probably end up creating a corrupt organization, while a group of humanitarian free thinkers will probably end up creating a worthwhile organization. It all depends on the intentions of theindividuals in the group, not on the group itself. Obviously, groups should always be subordinate to the individual.
JH: You mention that Edward Snowden’s breathtaking revelations, which detail the scope and power of the active global surveillance state, actually pale in comparison to some of the claims you make about gangstalking. That seems like a staggering claim, all things considered. Could you say more?
RG: I don’t think it’s that staggering at all. As far as I know, Edward Snowden never mentioned anything about invisible midgets, simian sharpshooters, leapfrogging robots, snooping flying saucers, and swarms of government-funded gangstalkers.
JH: If the Internet and the myriad digital technologies that have followed are like the first touch of the monolith by the apes in 2001: A Space Odyssey, then one might reasonably argue that the awakening process required of human consciousness right now to overcome our profound limitations is akin to entering the Stargate. Would you agree with that?
JH: What is gangstalking? Who gets gangstalked? Who gangstalks? How do you suppose gangstalkers get away with using expressions like “He’s evil,” as they stalk, while all the time, they are the ones committing the horrible crime of privacy invasion, character assassination, and, in some instances, conspiracy to commit brutal murders?
RG: The most concise and accurate definition of “gangstalking” can be found on fightgangstalking.com. Go to the home page, then click on the title “What is ‘Gang Stalking?’” [http://fightgangstalking.com/what-is-gang-stalking/]
JH: In your book you write: “Let’s not be obtuse: we’re dealing with a rule-crazy, Puritanical, hypocritical, Old Testament–style perception of reality that desperately needs to wipe out anything or anyone that is Other. Different. Contrary.” You seem to be arguing that such types are on the rise in America, and probably elsewhere as well. How do you explain such a backward, reactionary phenomenon at a time of so much futurism? If these kinds of humans prevail, what kind of future are we looking at?
RG: Back in 2003, I was fortunate enough to interview Rev. Stephan Hoeller, Bishop of the Gnostic Church in America, and during that conversation Hoeller said the following words to me, which I’ve never forgotten: “Do you remember The Last Temptation of Christ, Scorcese’s movie? There’s a scene where Jesus is trying to tell Pilate, ‘Look, you know, we want to change the world, but we want to change it with love. I don’t want to start a revolution. I don’t want to hurt anybody. I just want to change it with love.’ And Pilate says, ‘My good man, you don’t understand, we don’t want it to be changed at all. By no means, we don’t want any change!’ So, it’s a little bit that way. People involved in the matrix, they are within the consensus reality, they want reality to stay that way. To poke holes into that reality by one means or the other is very disturbing to such people. Those are the deeper psychological motivations of the dislike for psychedelics, or for that matter for ceremonial magic or Gnosticism, or anything that alters consciousness in any significant way.”
JH: The other thing I wanted to ask you about is some macro pictures. If you could sort of relate all of this to the Snowden revelations.
RG: Well, I guess the over-riding motto is: Never waste a good crisis. It’s quite ironic because I think that some of these people [gangstalkers] are being sold a bill of goods and think that they’re being upright — you know, Neighborhood Watch type citizens are being told: “Oh, you know, that guy down the street, he’s up to no good, you better do something about him.” In the book, Dion mentions a part where the cops stop him and they say that they were told that he talked about “doing something”. The accusation is vague enough, you know, it sounds vaguely ominous. And so I think these people are being told that this man down the street, he’s a terrorist, or he’s been talking about doing something, or he’s a pedophile, or whatever, and they believe it, and then they tell them to go and harass him at the local supermarket, go spy on him, and I think they might actually be doing that thinking that they’re protecting, you know, apple pie, and God and country, not realizing that they’rethe real terrorists.
RG: That’s the irony of it. Well, I know that when the George Zimmerman – Trayvon Martin tragedy occurred, Dion contacted me and wondered: Who’s this George Zimmerman guy? And who’s he actually working for? I mean, no one’s actually looked into that. I mean, George Zimmerman, his personality, is just the perfect gang-stalking personality. And I wouldn’t be surprised if he was trained by one of these organizations. You wouldn’t hear anything about that because no one’s looked into it… because, of course, gang-stalking doesn’t exist, so no journalist has ever bothered to look into it.
I think what’s going to happen is, if the whole gangstalking thing reaches a kind of critical mass at some point, people are going to be surprised at the fact that the Snowden revelations are just completely mundane compared to what’s actually going on. Just the tip of the iceberg. What Snowden’s talking about pales in comparison to whole neighborhoods being trained to be government-sponsored vigilantes, which sounds like a paradox — I mean, how could you be a government-sponsored vigilante? But that’s essentially what it is. I mean they’re taking these people and training them in how to be amateur COINTELPRO agents, and the idea that this could happen… I mean, most people are resistant to the whole concept of gangstalking. They don’t want to think gangstalking is even possible.
JH: If what happened to Dion, the experience he had in his apartment with the midgets or not doesn’t really matter, but the invisible bodies bumping against him, and the phantasmagorical hallucinations out his window, that kind of shit, that’s disturbing to the core, really. It’s the kind of thing that, if you realized that that was happening on any kind of scale at all, not just to a single individual, you’re talking about a very serious shift in consciousness, what you could call “real.” What would be true or real? You make reference to the Vallejo paintings that seem to fill Dion’s apartment window. What do you make of them?
RG: In terms of the paintings that they were using? You know, I think that they were using the technology that Richard Schowengerdt was describing. He on his own started talking about using the technology to be able to distort what people see, not just making things invisible but changing objects into something else. So I think they were testing that aspect of the technology, to see whether they could make a landscape just totally disappear and turn into something else.
JH: The thing I worry about out of all of this is — as you know there are like 1.5 million people on some kind of watch list in the States, and that’s just the known lists, the publicized lists. The number of people being watched actively because they’re targets of Obama or DOJ targets. The government has actually acknowledged the number of people on this list. And you know they can’t all be terrorists. So there have to be people who watch them. Then you realize the number of people out there who have these top secret clearances out there. Last I heard there was something like 750,000 people who have top secret clearance. Then you find out that all these private companies are basically stocked with people who are “retired”, meaning they left the service to go work for these companies and get lucrative awards for it.
RG: Well, there’s a surprising amount of these private corporations that are currently involved in this. Last August, this ad popped up on craigslist. And for years I wondered what the people involved, the gangstalkers following Dion, what they called themselves. Because obviously they don’t call themselves gangstalkers. That was the name applied to them by the targets, the victims, if you will. So I wondered: what do they call themselves? And this ad popped up from a corporation that was based in San Diego — and the headline of the ad read: “Surveillance Role Players and Practical Exercise Role Player, San Diego.” And this was the ad: “The MASY group — M-A-S-Y– is looking for motivated surveillance role players (SRPs) and scenario-driven practical exercise role players (RPs) to support military training activities in the San Diego, California region. Qualified personnel should demonstrate an established track record of conducting surveillance operations at various discretion levels, supporting surveillance training and military practical exercise training. Individuals with previous military intelligence community and law enforcement experience are highly preferred.” And then it says, “The mandatory prerequisite qualifications for role players is a minimum of 5 years of counterintelligence and/or human intelligence experience, with at least two operational deployments in a CI unit military occupational specialty, or as a member of a civilian intelligence community organization.”
So surveillance role players is the term they use to describe themselves. The ad quickly disappeared after that, but I saved it. And the MASY group, which is the organization that’s advertising this, they describe themselves as a “global provider of high impact national security intelligence and private sector capital management solutions.” These organizations — there’s MASY, there’s DSAC, which is the Domestic Security Alliance Council; there’s something called PKS Group, Prescient Edge; ITA International; Whitney Bradley and Brown; all these private companies working in tandem with these ex-military people. And in reality, they’re actually working in tandem with people who are currently military as well.
JH: Yes. You put your finger right on it. Because that’s the problem: There’s all of these assumptions about authority, such that the accuser is an authority requiring trust. When what all this Snowden-Surveillance State business should tell us, going all the way back to Nixon especially, all of our experience should tell us totally the opposite.
It’s very Stasi-like in that sense. The Stasi brought people in and would say to people either you’re working for us or you’re going away for a long time. And so some of these people did some sick things. And that’s how the whole thing grew. I think the last figure I had for the Stasi was that their number had grown to 350,000 people working for them, in a population of 17 million.
RG: It’s important to point out that this isn’t just happening to marginal people like Dion. This is also happening to people like Gloria Naylor. Do you know who she is? She’s a very famous, well-respected African-American writer. She wrote Mama Day and The
JH: I did a review of a book about two months ago, Suspicious Minds, written by two psychiatrist brothers, Joel and Ian Gold, and they write about the growing delusional trend in America, where people literally believe that they are actors in a Truman Show. Where everything is being directed by outside forces beyond their control, and that everybody else has a script.
RG: On the surface it sounds like a wonderful way for a psychiatrist to explain away people who claim they’re being gangstalked.
JH: I am mostly anti-psychiatry because I think they’re mostly full of shit. I think a lot of people forget that they’re not really out there to tend to individual humans; they are out to make you adjust to what’s out there, society. As R.D. Laing said, “An abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal.” Or bring in Nietzsche who said, “Insanity in individuals is rare, but in nations, states and societies it’s the norm.” So it’s that kind of thing going on here — you are trying to get people to adjust to a horrible, shitty situation. The structure of society can be such that its lies… that individuals pick up on that and it creates a real crisis in their own identity because there are some things you can’t adjust to without losing your mind.
RG: Earlier I mentioned a wonderful book called the The Secret Behind Secret Societies by Jon Rappoport. In that book he tells the story about a hypnotist he knew who worked in Beverly Hills. And the hypnotist’s name was Jack True. And the hypnotist told Jon Rappoport — he was a hypnotherapist — that when he has patients come into his office he often found that in order to put them into a trance he had to first break them out of a trance. That a lot of his patients came in already in a trance, and they had been in a trance for decades. And he had to break them out of that trance to then put them in a trance to do the hypnotherapy on them.
Maybe Chameleo will shatter a few trances here and there. You know, if Chameleo in any way helps to bring some of the targeted individuals together and talking to each other I would be extremely proud. Even if it succeeded in bringing just a few people together I would be very pleased. You know, maybe things are changing. There was a Washington Post article from last July. The title was “America’s Freedom Reputation Is on the Decline a Year after NSA Revelations,” and the first paragraph of the article read: “The main selling point of the U.S. brand on the international stage has long been summed up with the screech of one word: Freedom. But in the wake of revelations of U.S. surveillance programs from former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden from last year, the world is less convinced that the U.S. has respect for personal freedoms, according to new survey results from Pew Research.”
It goes on to say: “The Snowden revelations appeared to have damaged one major element of America’s global image — its reputation for protecting individual liberties. In 22 of 36 countries surveyed in 2013 and 2014, people are significantly less likely to believe the U.S. government respects the personal freedoms of its citizens. In six nations the decline was 20 percentage points or more. Pew calls this decline the Snowden Effect. And some of the drops are significant, especially in countries where NSA surveillance received major domestic news coverage, like Germany and Brazil.”
So that’s the Snowden Effect. Maybe there’ll be a Chameleo Effect. Who knows?
JH: The thing about that Pew Poll that is interesting, America is the leader when it comes to democracy, at least symbolically, at least when it comes to freedom, the rule of law, and due process — the kingpins of the Bill of Rights, which is the single most important thing about American democracy — you always have to face your accuser and then you have a process of evidentiary revelations, the cross-examinations, the witnessing, all that kind of stuff. That was the key thing for American justice. That was it. And throwing that out, not only by what the Pew Poll is saying, but also with Obama and his Drone Kill Tuesdays, where he sees himself dealing judicial review as a form of due process… and we just made it a lot easier for emerging democracies to ignore any attempt at installing a Bill of Rights, they won’t pursue them any more. If supposedly the greatest nation on Earth is suspending its own due process, then there really isn’t much point for any other nation to pursue it any longer.
RG: I teach at CSU Long Beach, and I recently assigned the graphic novel V for Vendetta by Alan Moore and David Lloyd. There’s a wonderful line in the book early on, where the masked anarchist vigilante figure, V, is having a conversation with a statue in London: it’s called Madame Justice. And he’s having this imaginary conversation with the statue. He’s basically talking about the difference between justice and anarchy, and there’s one line he says to the statue, “Justice is meaningless without freedom.” And the reason why this is in my mind is that a student of mine — I was reading his paper this morning, and basically his paper was all about that sentence. And the student wrote this really interesting introspective essay about how in the United States you hear a lot of talk about justice — the Justice Department, no justice no peace — there’s all these articles about how we need justice for what went down in Ferguson or whatever, but his whole point was that we need to be focused on freedom, not justice.
And you know, this is like an 18 year-old kid; he never read a graphic novel before. And he was really jazzed about this graphic novel and wrote this very thoughtful piece about it, and so that gives me hope when I see my students come in on the first day and they’re kind of ready to be bored, because that’s what they’re used to, and I’ll just pose questions, or I’ll give them something to read. And you see that they’re not entirely stupid; they’re not entirely sheeple. There’s a kind of a stereotype of teenagers plugged into their videogames or their iPod or Facebook, and their zombies, at least that’s the way older people might see them, but there’s actually this creativity and this intelligence that’s ready to burst out, but they’re so used to being told not to use their imagination that they’re stuck in a trance. So I kind of try to do what Jack True did; I kind of try to break them out of a trance in my own subtle way. I remain optimistic.
I wrote an article called “Concentration Campus,” which you can find in my first book,Cryptoscatology, and it’s an entire history of American education. My thoughts about the educational system are really summed up by that title. But I also wrote a follow-up article that’s not in the book called “The War Against the Imagination.” [You can find the article here:https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/the-war-against-the-imagination/] And basically it’s about the current state of education, and I really see that there’s some people who seem to want to go out of their way to deaden the imagination of the students and it’s quite distressing to see it. But whatever I can do to kind of counteract that is what makes me want to wake up in the morning.
JH: What is gangstalking and how do you fight it?
RG: I mentioned earlier that site fightgangstalking.com. It’s really good and I wish it had been around in 2003 because it would have saved a lot of trouble for me and Dion. It’s a very good site, very thorough. And there’s one section on the site you need to see. If you go to fightgangstalking.com, on the left side of the screen and you’ll see various headers, and one of them is “Tactics for Fighting Back.” I really recommend that anyone who is being gangstalked, or thinks they’re being gangstalked, or knows someone who’s being gangstalked, go there and read about all the wonderful, clear, concise and easy to do methods — I mean, these are within your reach, things that the common person can do to kind of offset or fight these people. Dion came up with his own unique methods of fighting them, including hurtling spaghetti at times, but these might be slightly more effective in the long run. The “Tactics for Fighting Back” section on that site is a really good list of defensive and offensive measures you can take against these perps.
JH: You are writing a long essay called “Nation of Stalkers.” Can you give a rough outline of what you might be covering?
RG: Basically it’s updating things that have happened since the end of the book, but also I offer other advice on fighting back, other than the sort of more prosaic level that’s being offered by the fightgangstalking website. I’m trying to go into some more esoteric methods to fight back as well.
JH: You mean like playing Bob Dylan songs backwards? That kind of thing?
RG: Well, I know a woman who’s very well-versed in remote viewing. She was trained by one of the major proponents of remote viewing, and she’s very good at it. I mean, other remote viewers come to her to ask her advice. My late friend Walter Bowart, author of Operation Mind Control, knew a remote viewer who could basically view from a distance these secret underground military installations and come back and give Bowart detailed information about them. And I began to think of how that technique could be used in the context of the gangstalking problem. I’ll touch on these types of things in “Nation of Stalkers.”
JH: There’s a gap between the narrative time and when Chamelo got written and published — a decade or so — what explains that?
RG: The only reason that I did end up writing the book finally was that random encounter, when I was teaching a Literature of Science Fiction class in 2010 at CSU Long Beach, and after class a student asked me the question: “Can you think of something that we think of as science fiction that is not science fiction?” And then he mentioned invisibility as an example of that, not knowing at all my interest in that. And so I answered the question, and I went into a brief synopsis, and I stood there talking to him for about a half hour. And I then I left, went home, and forgot about it. But then the next day the student had become so captivated that he wanted me to tell the whole class the story. So I told the whole class the story, and then speaking about it out loud, having a live captive audience to bounce the story off of, made me realize how to tell the story. I had been thinking in terms of maybe a short article, and I immediately wrote down in my notebook an outline with bullet points of everything that I had said in the order I had said it to the class. When the semester ended, and the summer break began, I just started writing it. And it quickly ballooned way past 30 pages and became over 300 pages. The process of writing the book went pretty smoothly.
Overall, I think Chameleo works because the tone of the story is not depressing. It could easily have been, but it’s not. In my nonfiction work about conspiracies I always try to include some sort of possible solution to whatever the dark problem is. There are a lot of writers who don’t do that. They sort of wallow in apocalypse culture. So I always try to have some kind of optimistic silver lining. Because it’s always important to have some kind of proactive solution, and not just wallow in what can be a very depressing reality.
JH: In the book the last word on Dion is in 2013 and I was just wondering if there has any word from him since then — you know, in the last couple of years?
RG: I’m in contact with Dion. He’s living in the Pacific Northwest. At one point he was living in a van. He actually has his own apartment now. He’s painting all the time. And the incidents are now intermittent.
The post Interview with Robert Guffey, author of Chameleo (OR Books 2015), March 2015 appeared first on disinformation.
The Octopus Tree, a Sitka Spruce, is located on the Oregon coast, only a few hundred feet from the Cape Meares Lighthouse. The tree is suspected to be between 250 – 300 years old.
How the Spruce came to be shaped like an octopus is unknown, but there are two popular theories. Some suspect that it was used formed by Native Americans to hold canoes and the dead. Others think it was just formed by extreme weather.
The sign posted in front of the tree reads:
The Forces that shaped this unique Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) have been debated for many years. Whether natural events or possible Native Americans were the cause remains a mystery.
The tree measures more than 46 feed in circumference and has no central trunk. Instead, limbs extend horizontally from the base as much as 16 feet before turning upward. It is 105 feet tall and is estimated to be 250 to 300 years old.
Either way, it’s badass and looks like a great place to read a book (if only it wasn’t cordoned off).
h/t Atlas Obscura.
Two weeks ago, several busloads of New Yorkers made a pilgrimage to Greenwich, Conn., to visit the waterfront estate of the hedge fund titan Paul Tudor Jones II, where, suffice it to say, they were not invited in to see the china. It was a rainy Saturday afternoon and the protesters, many of them ordinary working people who have felt cheated by the inequities of a tax system that favors the rarefied few, were there to call attention to Mr. Jones’s educational agenda, built on the premise that theextravagantly rich know better how to teach reading, and to his support of Republican candidates and causes in the New York State Legislature that disadvantage the poor and working class.
It is this kind of political spending, a total of $1.6 million over the past 12 years, they maintain, that undermines his philanthropic efforts through the Robin Hood Foundation, the poverty-fighting charity he created. To civilians, of course, Mr. Jones can seem like someone needing remedial work in cause and effect, a billionaire whose industry thrives on extracting economic value rather than producing it, and yet is comfortable speaking on the corrosive impact of inequality.
“When we begin to put justness on par with profits,” Mr. Jones said in a TED Talk recently, “then we get the most valuable thing in the world. We get back our humanity.” Hearing that is like listening to the Real Housewives of Orange County say that once we start prizing restraint over consumer spectacle, we’ll be well on our way to a new chapter in cultural dignity.
Those who made the trip to Connecticut were marching on behalf of a group called the Hedge Clippers, a nascent organization backed by the American Federation of Teachers, prominent labor and community groups, and Zephyr Teachout, the liberal former Democratic candidate for governor. It is aimed at outlining the ways hedge funds bleed the economy through self-interested practice and then extend the damage through the lavish purchase of political influence. According to an analysis by the group, hedge fund managers have made $40 million in political contributions in New York State over the past 15 years, with Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo receiving close to $5 million. Many of those donors are prominent supporters of charter schools, and nearly all would presumably denounce the elimination of tax loopholes that magnify their fortunes.
The Hedge Clippers produce and issue reports at a speed that would make many graduate students envious. This week they released a paper detailing the flow of money from hedge fund managers and high-frequency traders into Rahm Emanuel’s coffers; in Chicago, Mr. Emanuel’s mayoral tenure has been challenged by a bid from the left. Another report offered a list of buyers at One57, the ultraluxury condominium in Manhattan that benefited from considerable tax breaks…
[continues at the New York Times]
In response to yesterday’s post, “Climate change deniers & their dark money sugar daddies,” (which royally pissed some of you off) a reader sent us this article to share with the Disinfo crowd. An alternative perspective never hurt anyone.
I think what this tells us, both this post and Eleanor Goldfield’s, is that both sides have an agenda to push and we should be wary of the propaganda on both sides. Though, I’m most likely preaching to the choir here, so read on…
James Taylor writes at Forbes:
Global warming activists claim vast amounts of untraceable special interest money fund global warming skeptics and give skeptics an unfair advantage in the global warming debate. The undeniable truth is global warming alarmists raise and spend far more money – including far more untraceable special interest “dark money” – than global warming skeptics.
Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle published a paper last week in the journal Climatic Change identifying 91 conservative and libertarian think tanks that Brulle claims play an influential role opposing global warming programs. Brulle claims the 91 groups receive approximately $900 million in cumulative funding each year, with approximately $64 million coming from foundations that distribute “dark money” that cannot be traced to a particular donor. Brulle claims the $900 million in funding – and especially the $64 million in dark money – tilts the playing field and gives global warming skeptics undue political and public relations influence.
A look at some conservative think tank websites illustrates the point. While writing this article on New Year’s Day, I pulled up the website for the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which Brulle and the media claim is the conservative think tank receiving and spending the most money on global warming skepticism. AEI has 15 articles featured on the front page of its website, and not a single one focuses on global warming.
I also pulled up the website for the Heritage Foundation, which Brulle and the media claim is the conservative think tank receiving and spending the second most amount of money on global warming skepticism. The Heritage Foundation has 10 articles featured on the front page of its website. None of the 10 focuses on global warming. Merely 2 of the 10 focus on any aspect of energy or environment policy.
Between AEI and Heritage – representing fully 30 percent of the money raised by the 91 conservative think tanks – the global warming issue comprises substantially less than 10 percent of their cumulative time, money and efforts. Even if we generously assign to the global warming issue a full 10 percent of the money raised by the 91 foremost conservative think tanks, this means the 91 conservative think tanks are devoting a mere $90 million per year – rather than the asserted $900 million per year (or Goldenberg’s exaggerated $1 billion per year) – to the global warming debate.
And it is not just AEI and Heritage that devote little attention to the global warming issue. The Hoover Institution, identified as raising and spending the third most money on global warming skepticism, also rarely addresses the global warming topic. The most recent Hoover Institution item I can find addressing the topic is a short op-ed published more than two months ago in National Review Online by a Hoover Institution fellow commenting on a global warming poll. Prior to that short op-ed, the most recent Hoover Institution item I can find is an article published nine months ago supporting a carbon tax.
This brings us to another whopper told by Brulle, Goldenberg and their media allies – the assertion that all the think tanks identified in Brulle’s paper actively fight against global warming activism. To the contrary, two of the three top-funded groups (AEI and the Hoover Institution) support a carbon tax. Other groups identified in Brulle’s paper have similarly expressed support for a carbon tax and global warming activism. At least 25 percent of the funding that Brulle claims goes to skeptical think tanks actually goes to think tanks supporting global warming restrictions.
All told, giving the global warming activists every benefit of the doubt, no more than $90 million of conservative think tank money addresses global warming, and no more than $68 million supports conservative think tank efforts opposing global warming activism. This $68 million is counterbalanced by $22 million for conservative think tank efforts supporting global warming activism. That leaves a net of merely $46 million among 91 conservative think tanks opposing global warming activism.
Even though $46 million is far short of the $1 billion claimed by Goldenberg, $46 million may still seem like a large amount of money. It is only a drop in the bucket, however, compared to the money raised and spent by groups supporting global warming activism.
Two environmental activist groups – Greenpeace and The Nature Conservancy– raise more than $1 billion cumulatively per year. These two groups raise more money than the combined funding of the 91 conservative think tanks identified in Brulle’s paper. Just as importantly, these two groups raise money solely for environmental causes and frequently advocate for global warming restrictions. Their $1 billion is not diluted addressing issues such as economic policy, health care policy, foreign policy, etc.
Read the entire article at Forbes.
The post ‘Dark Money’ Funds To Promote Global Warming Alarmism Dwarf Warming ‘Denier’ Research appeared first on disinformation.
Jason Silva talks with Jamie Wheal (Executive Director of the Flow Genome Project) about “flow states” and human potential.
The post Harnessing the Limits of Human Possibility | Jason Silva and Jamie Wheal appeared first on disinformation.
Aaron and Shawn joke about the illuminati and the shiny new pope. They delve into how powerful people pretending to be good indicates the power of public opinion, and how comedy can be a tool to amplify and accelerate the global awakening. Featuring an interview with stand up comedian and talk show host Lee Camp.
This is hilarious.
Sonia Weiser via The Hairpin:
He pulled me close to him, his hips grinding up against my own. “I promise you,” he said. “I’m not into you because you remind me of my mother who was emotionally distant after my father died.” I kissed him, my heart pumping furiously now that he had answered one question that had been plaguing me all along.
“Are you sure?” I asked. “You’re not just saying that because you know it’s what I want to hear? If you are, just tell me. I’ll be fine with it. But honesty is really important to me.” He stopped my ramblings by covering my mouth with his hand. “I’m not just saying that,” he said, then dropped his hand to my waist. Before I could say anything, he added, his hot breath against my neck, “I washed my hands with soap and hot water just before this. Don’t worry.” I sighed, relieved that I hadn’t just been exposed to a handful of New York City germs. Did he use brand soap or generic? I should have checked his bathroom more closely when I had gone in earlier, but I had been too busy examining the mold-less shower curtain. “Brand,” he whispered as if he could read my mind. “Mrs. Meyers’ Clean Day.” He was sanitary and eco-friendly. My knees weakened and he pulled me towards him again, this time with more force.
He started unbuckling my pants. I was too drunk to stop him and he did it without asking whether I was ready to move on to that level of intimacy. We had just met. I imagined my therapist and the way he would claim to be entirely non-judgemental about my decision to have a one-night stand. I was conflicted in the same way I was always conflicted when ending up in a stranger’s bed, which was something I really needed to work on.
He stopped, leaving my pants on. “You’re not into this, I can tell,” he said. “Do you want to make a pros and cons list? I have a legal pad around here somewhere.” He scooted off the bed and looked in the top drawer of his dresser. I pushed myself onto my knees and peeked over his shoulder to see the contents and to assess whether, if need be, there would be enough room for me to eventually store some of my things in it. There was.
He found a notepad and pen and sat down next to me. If he had noticed that I was checking out the measurements of his drawer, he didn’t say anything.
I was at the high school dance. Waste of an evening. I mean, I wouldn’t have even considered going to something like this. It was embarrassing. But I knew she’d be there. I spent the whole night wishing I could get closer to her. Excuses to brush by, to look just a moment more. I didn’t want to be creepy. I wanted to be her friend.
And then the song started. You know the one. “You spin me right round baby, right round.”
Cheesy shit but we can all dance ironically. That makes it safer somehow.
Yeah I, I got to know your name. Well and I, could trace your private number baby. Amber. That was her name. Different hair color every week it seemed. Different piercings and tattoos. Same eyes. Nothing could change them. I wanted to.
So I stood in the corner. Gibberish numbers were bouncing around in my head, blocking everything else out. They seemed to come from the music but compound themselves, a feedback loop of infinite proportions. 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, …
She turned to look at me when the words “Watch out, here I come” seemed to blow the eardrums out of my cheap skull.
21, 34… ACTIVATE LEVEL 5.
Something horrible happened. A snake slithered through my intestines and wrapped its coils like a vice-around my brain, and it squeezed, squeezed, squeezed. The juices in my pineal gland squirted all over my shoes. I fell to the ground, crying, vomiting, shitting myself. Everyone around me looked on in terror, but the music kept playing.
—You keep spinning me right round baby, right round—
I dragged myself to my feet, staggered and convulsed. Reaching out for someone to for FUCK’S SAKE, HELP ME, and froze. Amber stood with her back slightly to me. On her shoulder, a butterfly. She saw what was happening to me but didn’t react like the others. She knew. A monarch butterfly. The music was triggering something in me. I had read about this somewhere. Project Monarch. CIA operatives. Was I a—? No.
Like that the switch flipped. Fzzzzt. Static tingle in my extremities. Click. Splice tape. All rules of reality moved tangentially to themselves, and suddenly I knew exactly who I had to kill and why. In another moment they would have me. Everything I’d believed, who my parents were, where I was raised, all of it was an implanted lie. I was a device, an automaton, with one horrific purpose.
My bladder released, as if heeding the call of whoever had programmed me in the first place. RELEASE, RELEASE, RELEASE, the order echoed through my body as if from a loudspeaker, and every system in my body took it altogether too literally. Release! My eyes screamed, evacuating tears and mucous. Release! My stomach said, disgorging thick splashes of stomach acid. Release! Release!
“You fuckers won’t take me alive!” I screamed, knocking over the punch bowl, bunching up the stained tablecloth and throwing it at the shrieking Field Hockey girls that were clustering in that part of the room like catty, horny squirrels.
I got to my feet, and shambled toward an open window, leaving a trail of shit, semen, and urine behind me. The music stopped when I reached the window. I could hear a commotion behind me—the school authorities had finally realized something wasn’t right. The cool air lingered over my face, a final beatific moment, respite from the sweaty pig pen that had been my invented life.
And I turned to see her, the last face I would see. She gave an indifferent shrug and took a drag on the smoke she had illicitly brought into the auditorium.
My body broke like bird bones in a cat’s mouth.
Did you hear about Jimmy, man?
You didn’t hear about fucking Jimmy! Dude! He shat all over himself – this is at the senior dance, too, right, everyone looking right at him as he gets covered in this mess of butt pudding—and he screamed along to the lyrics YOU SPIN ME RIGHT ROUND BABY RIGHT ROUND, I mean every word, screaming along and then-
You’re really freaking me out.
You should have fucking been there. Jimmy soiled himself, and projectile vomited the whole way to the window, and you’re telling me about freaking? At the window he screamed YOU’LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE and then? Took a header for the concrete.
It’s only two stories.
Fine, then you jump out the window face first and tell me—
—Whatever. So is that why he wasn’t in Gym today?
Uh, yeah. Dude. He’s fucking dead.
Hm. Guess I don’t have to give back his PSP, then.
Yeah. Anyway, fucked up about Jimmy, huh?
I guess. Come on, let’s get out of here.
From the 404 Documents, excerpted from Party At The World’s End with permission.
Interesting link between denial of science and predilection for conspiracy theories via the Washington Post:
In 2013, the University of Bristol psychologist Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues published two papers containing a provocative claim: A tendency to endorse conspiracy theories, they suggested, makes people more likely to challenge various aspects of science, too. Across the two papers, they linked conspiratorial beliefs to science rejection on no less than five issues: climate change, vaccines, genetically modified organisms, and the ties between HIV and AIDS and smoking and lung cancer.
Since then, the research has been widely discussed and criticized — particularly the conclusion about climate science rejection — and now, the intensity of the debate seems set to go up yet another notch. The reason is that the journal Psychological Science has just published two papers on the matter: one, a statistical critique of the Lewandowsky papers, and the other a response from Lewandowsky and his co-authors (also discussed in a blog post here).
The critique, by Ruth Dixon and Jonathan Jones of Oxford University, charges that the most publicized conclusion of the prior studies, that believing in conspiracy theories is linked to climate change skepticism, is “not supported by the data.” Lewandowsky and his team, meanwhile, say that Dixon and Jones have undertaken an “atheoretical and highly circumscribed reanalysis,” and they stand by their results.
The claim of a link between climate change skepticism and conspiracy theories — which Lewandowsky and his colleagues measure with a questionnaire that asks about whether the moon landings were faked, whether Princess Diana’s death was an accident, whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in assassinating JFK, and much more — has been very widely discussed and debated in the blogosphere and beyond…
[continues at the Washington Post]
The post The Hotly Contested Link Between Science Denial and Conspiracy Theories appeared first on disinformation.
Republished with permission from occupy.com/actout
On this week’s episode, we shine a light on the dark money funded climate change deniers; the bible thumpers and snowball throwers who think their lack of science knowledge excuses them from listening to 97% of scientists! We debunk their shallow bullshit “arguments” and give you the tools to fight these nut bags and save the planet!
The post Climate change deniers & their dark money sugar daddies appeared first on disinformation.