What is Fakery

[sharpstuff]

WHAT IS FAKERY?
__________________

There are two definitions of fakery if one believes in polarities (on or off, ‘good’/‘bad’ and so forth).

If one believes (or has reason to believe) that such polarities exist then life is a quandary between the on/off switch (tangible or not) and continuous movement between 0 and 1.

Thus one must believe that the Universe as we perceive it as individuals is either a digital 'creation' or an ‘analogue’ one.

A problem arises, however, that a laser (for example) in a DVD conversion of an analogue signal (e.g. a VHS or audio tape) has to move in an analogue fashion to create the next digit for possible retrieval. Thus nothing is truly ‘digital’; it is only a representation of an analogue signal punished into small pieces. However close, it can never be a reality that a mind perceives as, say, a ‘live’ concert where people are playing/singing in what we call ‘real time’.

Whatever ‘reality’ is, it is analogue (continuous) not ‘digital’ (discontinuous).

The difference between analogue and digital is profound and in my view will always be recognised as such. There will always be the ‘uncanny valley’ effect, unless I am much mistaken. The ‘spark of life’ is missing.

The Universe is either digital or analogue, you take your choice and follow that notion.

If one believes that the Universe is 'built' from some sort of 'particles' ('atoms' and their ever decreasing brethren via complex and expensive machines, bubble chambers and suchlike) then one is still unable to explain how one 'particle' reacts with another in any tangible sense (or if it exists in the first, second or third place). Smashing something to bits, can never tell us how it works!

The science of mixing one set of 'particles' with another set of 'particles' may work in 'chemistry' at a gross level (a bit of pepper and salt here and see what happens) but what is actually happening? Answer: Nothing we can explain in tangible terms of what we choose to call 'Nature' (that from which all derives without our knowledge and consent).

The earth (planet, or whatever) that we live upon and the 'Universe' that we create only with our personal propensities is an ever-changing environment into which we are placed according to our arrival here.

Fakery is an analogue between two (decided) poles, a positive and/or a negative.

There is an infinity between 0 and 1. It is the 'between' that matters!

Digital will never be analogue, however small the distance between the digits. The human brain can tell the difference depending on the perceptions of the individual but the 'spark' of ‘life’ will always be lost.

Again, an MP3 will never sound the same as a .wav file (as analogue as it can be). In terms of 'real', a CD will never sound the same as a long-playing record on analogue speakers and will never sound the same as a 'live' broadcast of tangible instruments.

Having said all the above, fakery may be simplified (although probably/possibly not totally accurate):

1. An intent to deliberately deceive.
2. An intent to produce something that intends to show what something would be like (the same as or similar) as a purported substitute to a possible outcome. In other words, a simulation of an event.

In my work as a designer, working from only a technical drawing, I produced a black and white half-tone of the finished machine which was used in publications. This was 'fake' but was never meant to deceive. We need to understand the concept of fakery for positive uses.

There will always be a continuous process between these apparent polarities. Thus we have (again 'polarities') of the jolly old 'good'/'bad' syndrome.

I do not think we should lead ourselves into the notion that all fakery is not good. It is undoubted that fakery is part of this World (which I personally choose to reject). Thus I am not influenced by this ‘Worldly’) nonsense and have better use of my time, energy and health. However, it is an interesting academic exercise.

I would welcome positive replies.

[Painterman]

I'd say "fake" is a synonym of "counterfeit" in that both describe attempts to pass off something through intentional deception. Merely duplicating or simulating, without deceptive intent, is not faking.

That element of deception can make exposing fakery to others difficult. People sometimes resist acknowledging deceptions they themselves fell for, because they assume such credulity reflects poorly on their intelligence. Actually, there is no such implication. For example, September Clues put many people wise to 9/11 without implying anyone was dumb for failing to notice the (now obvious) fakery beforehand.

Intelligent people get deceived when they trust someone who, behind a charming mask, ends up being a calculating faker. Don't blame yourself because a lowlife with an agenda took advantage of your guileless nature.

[CluedIn]

How far does fakery extend? I don't find this article surprising, however, I do wonder what people who work for these agencies think when information like this is brought up to the public. I'm sure there are those saying, its a clandestine group, so you would have to play some games internally. There is always justification for fakery and its use is being admitted (or purposely being broadcast) more and more - why not, especially when it has been legalized.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/eyewash-how-the-cia-deceives-its-own-workforce-about-operations/2016/01/31/c00f5a78-c53d-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html

[Painterman]

How far does fakery extend?

Fakery extends even to the (fake) study of (real) fakery. Of course it would.

Propaganda 101: "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it."

Hence, with total predictability, fakers gonna fake (i.e. astroturf) the study of their own fakery through manufactured gurus conspicuous by their presumption of "leadership" behind a Regular Joe mask (quite politician-like, actually). No doubt such cognitive infiltration has been in every edition of The Spook's Propaganda Manual since the days of Bernays.

Considering the sheer quantity, and frequent Hollywood production values, of YouTube astroturf counterculture - not to mention the dime-a-dozen helpers promoting these videos at astroturf blogs and whatnot - it's possible that the alternative media has caught up to the mainstream media in terms of resources allocated to controlling the public mind, including dollar figures in the billions.

Where's it all headed? The answer shows itself more clearly through a different question: On what do the mainstream media and their junior partners in crime, the fake alternative media, agree?

Answer: "We are living in a simulation."

That's where all branches of the culture-counterculture complex seem to be headed: a total-immersion endgame in which the media has replaced reality with itself. The intended result of the deluge of hypnotic, traumatic, pornographic, disengagement-inducing media is that the citizenry accept some variation of It's All Fake, So Why Bother? - and thus let the crime gang which runs the media complete their takeover of society unopposed.

It's one thing, often an admirable thing, to live for a dream - quite another to live in a dream, especially when it's not even your own dream but nihilistic programming supplied by social engineers through the media, including YouTube.

[CluedIn]

I have noticed one thing lately that seems to be happening on most of the news sites I visit - they are not running ads before they play the propaganda videos you click on. Probably not getting enough people to stick around to watch the video so they cut the ads out. Can't think of any other reason they would begin doing this.

[Painterman]

More to add on this fine choice of subject, Sharpstuff.

The article "Fear, uncertainty and doubt" at Wikipedia is worth a look:

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and a manifestation of the appeal to fear.

While the phrase dates to at least the early 20th century, the present meaning of disinformation appeared in the 1970s to describe disinformation in the computer hardware industry, and has since been used more broadly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_unc ... _and_doubt

I especially recommend scrolling to the "see also" section for links. Meanwhile, I'll briefly recap certain points, by way of context for the citation.

The alternative media's cognitive infiltrators - whose job entails "running to the head of the parade" to pose as leaders - are heavily into FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), though every infiltrator doesn't necessarily push all three elements of the (compartmentalized) public relations campaign. Indeed, the main infiltration of relevance to Cluesforum hardly pushes Fear at all, because that doesn't sell well to this demographic (as opposed to the prepper demographic, for example). So they sing us a "nothing is real" lullaby instead.

Notice how the parasitical agitators targeting this forum's demographic focus on Doubt and Uncertainty about - and thus loss of confidence in, and abandonment of - established social institutions whereby the People collectively resist the criminal plutocracy's conquest of society: e.g. science (the basis of economic development), democratic self-government, etc.

Pardon the following self-quotation, because this discussion recalls a comment of mine on the badly fake performance by a crisis actor in the Paris terror hoax of last November:

Marielle illustrates the greater takeaway: that acting is a lost art. This also goes for psyop actors pretending to help our cause - while really trying to neutralize it by misguiding us to the lunacy of intellectual nihilism - in the so-called alternative media. All you have to do is wait a while, and the liars betray themselves (as they've already done you). Let them talk.

"Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy." - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1847&start=135#p2398014

[ICfreely]

Notice how the parasitical agitators targeting this forum's demographic focus on Doubt and Uncertainty about - and thus loss of confidence in, and abandonment of - established social institutions whereby the People collectively resist the criminal plutocracy's conquest of society: e.g. science (the basis of economic development), democratic self-government, etc.

I appreciate your valiant attempts at trying to protect the integrity of this forum. Would you please provide some examples of the 'parasitical agitators' you speak of?

[ICfreely]

For the record, shithead polluted the 'Einstein...' thread instead of responding to my perfectly reasonable question here in this thread!

Why is this pussy allowed to pussyfoot around like the pussy that he is?

Does he have special house boy privileges that I'm not aware of?

[ICfreely]

Notice how the parasitical agitators targeting this forum's demographic focus on Doubt and Uncertainty about - and thus loss of confidence in, and abandonment of - established social institutions whereby the People collectively resist the criminal plutocracy's conquest of society: e.g. science (the basis of economic development), democratic self-government, etc.

WTF is he talking about? So is he suggesting we avoid questioning established social institutions? Doesn't every line of questioning begin with doubt and uncertainty? Does he fear doubt & uncertainty? If so, why? Why does he feel it necessary to instill his fears into others?

What does the term 'democratic self-government' mean?

Seriously, WTF is Vaguey Vagueman talking about?

[ICfreely]

This coward keeps implying I'm a nihilist parasitical destroyer meanwhile he never adds any original content - just unsubstantiated opinions. He never takes a stand. He's the personification of relativist-nihilism - an empty shell, a practical non-entity! And he projects his emptiness onto me! Why is this Strawman allowed to play thought police here? What purpose does he serve?

[simonshack]

Painterman,

You stand accused of playing thought-police here. What have you to say in your defence?


*****************************

ICfreely,

You are basically saying / lamenting that "either you're with me or you're with Painterman - and in the latter case, I'm outta here".
All I can say is that if a single 'policeman' or 'parasite' can make you run away - it doesn't bode too well for this world's next revolution.

[Seneca]

Painterman,
I think that ICfreely has explained himself very well in his earlier post on this topic.
To me it also looks like you're saying some institutions shouldn't be scrutinized.

I want to clear up one possible source of confusion that is affecting a lot of discussions about science:
The word "science" obviously has different meanings. I'll mention just 2 of them

1)a way of approaching problems, of analysing reality
2)a product of people who claim to be engaged in scientific work, whereby often this work is their main source of income.

They are not perfect definitions but they show there is a difference.
I think that most, if not all people are very supportive of science in the first meaning. And that most people are, because of their experience, very critical of a big portion of science in the second meaning.

[sharpstuff]

I am not sure if this chap is known to any forum members/casual readers but I watched one of his videos via Fakeologist and found him fascinating.

http://fakeologist.com/

His exposure of fake videos is appealing and entertaining...

https://www.youtube.com/user/CaptainDisillusion

I did learn a great deal from his videos.

My apologies if this is old news.

[sharpstuff]

Once again, I hope this is not old information.

I came across this video (regarding facial fakery) from one of my very few trusted sites:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=130738

A direct link to YouTube is at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKkuWX406q4

I found it fascinating and more than a little scarey for the future although I love animation.

If this post is not in an appropriate place, please can it be moved?

[CluedIn]

sharpstuff, thanks for that link - I did not know they had that capability, although nothing surprises me anymore.

I do wonder if they have begun manipulating people's memories by messing with their cloud stored digital photographs, video's, etc.?