How do we adjudicate the truthfulness of media figures, political pundits, scientific institutions, government institutions and other various current information sources? There are different types of truths. Basically there is empirical truth which is factual information that can be verified such as basic news like “there was a fatal accident on Main Street” or it “rained today in parts of Minneapolis”. Observable events corroborated by witnesses. These are easy to process and validate. But for persons seeking to build and construct meaningful worldviews more subjective criteria are needed to vet information sources. This combines both empirical facts and then the ability to interpret these events in a historical context.brianW

There are two basic litmus tests that can be used for a quick barometric gauge of information source integrity. (1) 911 was an epic event that has greatly influenced the last decade and of half of American culture as well as internationally. What exactly happened in all specifics is not know but it is readily accepted by those who have spent any time researching this event that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition and this could not have been done without the complicity of what we can call “rouge” elements of the US government. The scale of the subsequent cover up(s) and efforts that have been made to deceive the American public are enormous. It is now 15 years after this event and if a person cannot see this as an enormous conspiracy and an inside job then their opinions and constructs would be of little significance. (2) It is now almost 2018 and for over 3 years now the myth of the Heliocentric universe has been gradually debunked. Many have not been exposed to or conditioned  to not deal with this subject. So we will give them time. But for others who have examined the evidence for the empirical truth that our world is planar and still hold to the heliocentric model I would adjudicate that their cognitive abilities are compromised by ideological or material obstacles that render them unreliable sources for useful input to your worldview.

When vetting the sources of information that you choose to utilize be assured that anyone that adheres to the traditional scripted versions of the 911 event is an unreliable information source.  This event had such far reaching effects on world history that unless 911 is taken into account their information is of little value because it has left out one of the key ingredients of the polemics of recent history. Likewise, if a person/source cannot or chooses not to realize the the heliocentric view of our habitat they can’t be of much value because they don’t even know where they live.

There are many reasons that people can’t understand the 911 event and the Flat Earth model of where we live. They would include some of the following:

cognitive deficiencies
disinformation agents
ideological affiliations bribery
sell outs
immature/fragile worldviews

Currently it is a career killer for many in high positions to express any opinion of this event (911) other than what has been “officially” endorsed by mainstream media (aka government propaganda department) . Those of prominence who do question the official lie about this event generally are marginalized and experience significant financial hardship because they are no longer welcome to the liars poker game.

So you can discount such political pundits, media personages, politicians, corporate schills, and the gatekeepers of academia from any useful input to truth. The are either mentally deficient or lacking in integrity. This group can still be useful, however in detecting BS. When you spot a group of these persons dropping similar markers it generally means the propaganda ministry has issued new sound bites and directives to its minions to be consumed by the stupefied masses. The propaganda is usually presented in polarized Democratic and Republican contexts but realizing one is being presented a scripted information narrative can alert you to dig further to find the purpose of this organized deceit/disinformation campaign.

The Internet is very helpful in charting a course for acquiring truth but at the same time it can be information overload and who do we trust? The litmus test presented above can be one way to parse down your information sources. If they are lying about the 911 event, for whatever reason, how can we expect to gain anything from their worldviews? This simple vetting process can assist you in focusing on persons/sources that may be of some merit. If a source has been compromised in this area you will never be able to tell when they are being truthful or when they are manipulating information for their own purposes. It doesn’t matter how many Pulitzer prizes or accolades they have acquired, they lack integrity or are just plain stupid. This will probably enable you to eliminate 90% of the BS on the internet and other media sources.

We can, however, give thanks to Disinfo agents and Pathocrats and Arrogant Elitists for their hubris in providing us the instruments of their own destruction.


This is a more complicated process. People are irrational and often guided by ideological viewpoints, egos, superegos, current cultural trends, propaganda, corrupt spirits, deceitful purposes, chemistry and general intellectual deficits. Equally important if not more so is to find out who is paying their way in life. In other words follow the money trail. Few persons in life are free enough financially nor intellectually nor politically to not care about how they are accepted among peers and friends and the general populace. We need human engagement and still like to be occasionally invited to diner by some friends even if some of them are loathsome to us. That is why solitary confinement is such a painful punishment. Few will have the courage and resources to swim against the current, so to speak. Oftentimes we will find helpful resources on “roads less traveled” living in exile from much of the mainstream.

Additionally, I personally have a problem in accepting our currently dictated historical timelines and chronologies. For those who have the courage entertain this potential cognitive disturbance start looking at the works of the Russian mathematician, Anatoly Fomenko. I am currently studying his proposals and new historical chronologies. (Too soon to have an opinion but your comments to me may be helpful on this issue). The printing press has been a great ally in historical reconstruction but prior to 1600 I am not as sure of historical chronologies. We’ll see.

So let’s look at a couple of examples of sources I consider reasonably truthful and ones that I would rely on:

Soren Kierkegard: Danish philosopher/theologian/psychologist. He was financially independent due to family inheritances. Did not seem to care too much about being in adversarial relationship with the church at the time, and was never a mainstream figure. Life is reasonably well documented and dated. Apparently a bit “eccentric”. Because of his financial situation he had the time for deep analysis and study in his areas of interest. A prolific writer.

Nikolai Tesla:






Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s