integral

The epistemology you're asking for is scientific papers and an external authority figure as the source of truth. One of the many epistemologies i used to come to my conclusions was to experiment and observe. I took medication or drugs, people in my air space got high in various circumstances, context and situations. Using 1 epistemology to make sense of anything is terrible science. Got to practice holistic epistemology. The claim i made was that its transmissible in the air but to be clear its 100% with out question transmissible vay touch. If you take LSD and your dog licks your skin they will get super high.

Your right i made a mistake on the womans hormons as i was running off misconceptions culture told me instead of verifying it happen with my own eyes. My other points i have verified from first hand experience. Especially with air transfer of medication or psychedelics with people that your sleeping with in the same bed room all night. Its the hot boxing effect except your skin and breath release it into the air.

https://www.meshy.ai/ This website gives you 500 free credits to generate a bunch of 3D models, you could even rig the model and animate it. It's amazing

What is the quality of the place you moved into, is there mold damage?

The billionaire only cares about what is practical. You don't need to introspect when you're "winning".

@zurew I have a question: what makes Heaven's Gate and Flat Earth communities different from actualized.org? If we take the definition Leo gave of a cult very strictly like it's some list of rules (Playing devil's advocate), then Heaven's Gate won't fit into that definition of a cult. Leader 100% believed his worldview and everyone in the community went on board and fully adopted and altered their identity to match that worldview. Well let's say actualized.org did something similar pushing everyone to be epistemically responsible. And aligned with the higher Vision possibly that Leo has created. Why is actualized.org not just another complete load of arbitrary Belief systems like every other community?

Vocabulary is important but that's separate from obfuscation. We need jargon to describe very specific things in the field and that's perfectly fine. Math is defining important functions into short hand terms, this is a good use of syntax. "We conducted a survey" -> "We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 200 college students about their sleep habits." This is reasonable. It adds to the accuracy of the reading. The above is fine and it's explaining a system using terminology that is useful and needed. What's being smuggled in this text is the accuracy of the system. Because it's written with such certainty at every step, it doesn't take the time to place the epistemic humility, "it possibly does". It simply lays out a system as fact, and this fact-like speaking is a deception. Detail oriented people love FactSplaining.

I like how Bezos tried to smash... Let's keep it real

Self-obscure: To hide one's own weakness behind complexity. Works as a verb. "He self-obscures whenever the topic gets close to something he doesn't actually understand."

Why would anyone who cares about truth play all these games when writing a research paper? Obscuritism 🌈 It blows my mind that most scientist are not conscious that they are partaking in obscuritism. 🤯 The first Insight that that should come to someone's mind when they are exposed to Scientific language is that their intentionally fluffing it all up to make them sound as smart as possible. Which is one of the stupidest things you can do, and lacks intellectual integrity

This is not the statistical worldview from a scientific lens. Statistics is the wrong word to use. You're mixing, probabilistic thinking + a multifactorial thinking + dialectical thinking + holistic thinking It makes more sense to call it probabilistic systems thinking. True scientific statistics is much closer to reductionist thinking method, trying to narrow down a messy world into variables we can measure. And then when you have no epistemic sense or integrity, they write a research paper pawning a correlation for causation

In practice we use statistics to prescribe medication to patients In practice doctors view all correlation as causation. They have no awareness of the difference Huge chunks of societal belief systems are based on false causation from statistical correlation At some point in the 70s it clicked that you could use science to run your scams, and they ran with it for 50 years

it's weird that she choose physics and space/time to push the boundaries on. You can't push the boundaries on these topics if you don't know what a paradigm is. All your imagination is wasted Inside the Box

Yeah so a person uses the word to point to something. So a word won't be meaningful put out the user.