Power Independence Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

 Moderated by: Joe Kelley
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Knowledge  Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Fri Dec 12th, 2014 04:16 pm
  PM Quote Reply
1st Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6409
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Principles exist.

http://lionsofliberty.com/2014/12/12/unmasking-charlatans/

I do not know of any other method of unmasking charlatanism than through inquiry, whether by yourself, or from observing his response to someone else’s intelligent inquiry. How the person responds to inquiry settles the matter of whether they are merely a fool or they are indeed a true charlatan.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Feb 10th, 2021 08:48 am
  PM Quote Reply
2nd Post
JordanCollier
Member
 

Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2021
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Joe Kelley wrote:
Principles exist.
https://www.slotozilla.com/free-slots/quick-hit-platinum

I do not know of any other method of unmasking charlatanism than through inquiry, whether by yourself, or from observing his response to someone else’s intelligent inquiry. How the person responds to inquiry settles the matter of whether they are merely a fool or they are indeed a true charlatan.

To explain the phenomenon that underlies the methodology, complex and poorly understood terminology is used, relying on concepts whose existence has not been proven; often the rationale is simply a collection of unrelated scientific terms.

Theoretically, one could be limited to this criterion. Any modern method of real-world diagnosis can be explained as simply as possible. Not everyone can do it: simplification is also a skill. But it is possible in principle. Protein electrophoresis, MRI, ECG can all be explained briefly, using the conceptual apparatus of school biology course.

Let's make a small experiment and try to explain X-ray diagnosis. If electrons are greatly accelerated and then sharply slowed down, e.g. by a glass obstacle, powerful radiation with very good penetrating power will be produced. It can pass through body tissues as well: through dense tissues less so, through those filled with air more so. If you put a part of the body between the light source and the photographic plate you will get an image in which the bones will appear light (they trap the radiation) and the lungs or the intestine will appear dark (they have almost no loss of radiation passing through).

And here is a quote describing the principle of operation of one of the pseudo-diagnostic devices: "The apparatus functions based on the principle of amplifying the initiating signal in the decay of metastable structures. Magnetic moments of molecular currents of impurity centres of the brain cortex nerve cells under the influence of an external electromagnetic field lose their initial orientation, due to which the spin structures of delocalized electrons are disordered, which causes unstable metastable states in them, the disintegration of which plays the role of an initiating signal amplifier". As they say, feel the difference. It is impossible to read even to the end at the first attempt, let alone to understand and retell in your own words.[url][/url]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Feb 10th, 2021 02:33 pm
  PM Quote Reply
3rd Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6409
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
"...let alone to understand and retell in your own words."

I have run into this problem of communication as I attempt to receive clear messages from the book On Language by Noam Chomsky.

The sentences are assembled and published, but I fail to get any clear meaning from them. While the book is lost in storage somewhere it isn't possible at this moment to get an example of such a sentence.

My hypothesis here is such that the concept of communication requires the power of agreement for success if the intention on both writer and reader is to transfer a specific message intact from writer to reader.

A test of the hypothesis could include a number of test messages, a number of writers, and a number of readers.

A writer writes a unique version of the message that intends to convey the specified meaning. A reader reads that unique version of the message.

If the reader fails to prove that the message received by that reader does not agree with the intended message sent by the writer, then another reader is used to retest the unique version of the message written by that single writer.

If all the readers did not fail to receive the intended message, then all the readers were not in agreement as to their incapacity to read the intended message with that single unique use of language.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Thu May 20th, 2021 12:41 pm
  PM Quote Reply
4th Post
MortonAster
Member
 

Joined: Thu May 20th, 2021
Location: Germany, Andorra
Posts: 1
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Joe Kelley wrote:
Principles exist.

Try https://kasynoonlineautomaty.pl/white-rabbit/ you found here a lot of amazing things

I do not know of any other method of unmasking charlatanism than through inquiry, whether by yourself, or from observing his response to someone else’s intelligent inquiry. How the person responds to inquiry settles the matter of whether they are merely a fool or they are indeed a true charlatan.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 02:21 pm  
Power Independence > National Liberty Alliance > NLA General Discussion > Knowledge Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems