I myself found that the habit created by main stream was to ask "for evidence", while making you believe that evidence is only hard rock solid "proofs". Even court cases get resolved with far less evidence than the kind we have been trained to demand. And here we are not talking about convicting someone. just what our gut tells us.
What I learnt myself is that, our brain does an amazing job of processing a lot of circumstantial evidence and identifying patterns to give us a good idea about the world view that makes sense to us. This is where instinct and gut feeling comes into picture. Its our brains way to communicate this complex processing.
Not excluded, just not believed until proven. Evidence is grounds for investigation. Investigation can lead to proof, but not always. Right now we have patterns (as you have said) and rumor—enough in my opinion to investigate.
If we go out screeching like Lin Wood, that is when even people who would normally be on our side will reject us. Just like how David Icke discredits all conspiracies for going off the deep-end. Same thing happened with pizza gate. Even though for decades there has been evidence of child trafficking—particularly with government involvement (Franklin Scandal)—but the way it was presented was horrible, and normies rejected it.
We know Roberts has made shitty decisions almost from day 1. There's rumors, his association with people who are suspect (or guilty), so I say let's investigate. If the gov won't do it, maybe we should start pooling our money together and hiring an agency (or multiple ones) to investigate these people ourselves.
Same thing happened with pizza gate. Even though for decades there has been evidence of child trafficking—particularly with government involvement (Franklin Scandal)—but the way it was presented was horrible, and normies rejected it.
Pizzagate was labeled a conspiracy theory by CNN and the rest of the MSM and that was the only presentation the normies received.
What I learnt myself is that, our brain does an amazing job of processing a lot of circumstantial evidence and identifying patterns to give us a good idea about the world view that makes sense to us.
You mean a terrible job, leading to uncontrolled confirmation bias and mind rot if not tempered by reason.
You instincts are not always correct, but nothing is. More often than not, your instincts will lead you the right way, and those times it does not, it learns for the future.
I am sorry to hear that you haven't learnt to truly trust your instincts. I hope you reach there some time.
The outcome of the reasoning is one of the inputs to our emotional brain, along with observations, circumstantial evidence, patterns caught by subconscious, etc.
The instinct you feel is the outcome of everything considered together.
You are solely focusing on the second part and missing the first part. I understand where you are coming from. I spent decades thinking that way.
As in, circumstantial evidence excluded?
I myself found that the habit created by main stream was to ask "for evidence", while making you believe that evidence is only hard rock solid "proofs". Even court cases get resolved with far less evidence than the kind we have been trained to demand. And here we are not talking about convicting someone. just what our gut tells us.
What I learnt myself is that, our brain does an amazing job of processing a lot of circumstantial evidence and identifying patterns to give us a good idea about the world view that makes sense to us. This is where instinct and gut feeling comes into picture. Its our brains way to communicate this complex processing.
Not excluded, just not believed until proven. Evidence is grounds for investigation. Investigation can lead to proof, but not always. Right now we have patterns (as you have said) and rumor—enough in my opinion to investigate.
If we go out screeching like Lin Wood, that is when even people who would normally be on our side will reject us. Just like how David Icke discredits all conspiracies for going off the deep-end. Same thing happened with pizza gate. Even though for decades there has been evidence of child trafficking—particularly with government involvement (Franklin Scandal)—but the way it was presented was horrible, and normies rejected it.
We know Roberts has made shitty decisions almost from day 1. There's rumors, his association with people who are suspect (or guilty), so I say let's investigate. If the gov won't do it, maybe we should start pooling our money together and hiring an agency (or multiple ones) to investigate these people ourselves.
Pizzagate was labeled a conspiracy theory by CNN and the rest of the MSM and that was the only presentation the normies received.
Ya Media Matters censoring for their chomies.
You mean a terrible job, leading to uncontrolled confirmation bias and mind rot if not tempered by reason.
You instincts are not always correct, but nothing is. More often than not, your instincts will lead you the right way, and those times it does not, it learns for the future.
I am sorry to hear that you haven't learnt to truly trust your instincts. I hope you reach there some time.
My instincts lead me to look into things. Reason allows me to evaluate what I find.
You seem to be missing the second step.
Reasoning happens in the logical brain.
The outcome of the reasoning is one of the inputs to our emotional brain, along with observations, circumstantial evidence, patterns caught by subconscious, etc.
The instinct you feel is the outcome of everything considered together.
You are solely focusing on the second part and missing the first part. I understand where you are coming from. I spent decades thinking that way.