Another article posted in Alternate Realities that probably has no place here.
@Quix - why not post these where the belong?
Last I understood such . . . Alternate Realities for this forum are as construed by . . . drum roll . . . moi.
Perhaps you haven't read this OP here:
"Alternate Realities" as a Construct, Descriptor, Label, Domain, Sphere . . . http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?topic=233110.msg1125967#msg1125967ALTERNATE REALITIES, to me,includes whatever strikes my interest as bearing meaningfully on our rapidly changing world in these END TIMES--particularly as related to Biblical prophecy, globalism, UFO's, "ET's," MSM propaganda and manipulations, the ruling oligarchy, conspiracies true and/or hypothesized, potential &/or actual significant events on the road to a one world religion and one world government; abuses of government; mass mind control; mass population control and control of individuals; 'mind-numbing lobotomization' via technology; mangled relationships; destruction of the family; [/b] etc. etc. etc.
So, given Alternate Realities as a construct--the other end of it would be, to me, the more conventional realities blathered about and construed as "real" by the Main Stream Media and most sheeple, lemmings, Eloi of the masses of people shuffling about on the streets toward the caverns of the Morlachs {for the uninitiated--see globalist H.G. Well's THE TIME MACHINE}.
One could list the label as
Alternate Realities/Conventional DelusionsWith that as the construct, Conventional Delusions would be the FALSE, UNREAL, UNTRUE end of things.
The label could be
1. Alternate Realities/Propagandized, lobotomized, mind-controlled virtual fantasiesor
2. Alternate Realities/Oligarchy spoon-fed VR {Virtual Realities) mind feedsor
3. Alternate Realities/Soma-supported stuporor
4. Alternate Realities/Conventional assumptionsetc.
Y'all can offer your own 'other end' of the construct for my consideration, if you wish. Nasty ones may be deleted, however. LOL.
I think I prefer #1 above.
The question may arise about whether or not I fantasize that most of my and/or others' threads hereon are truer, to me, than "Conventional Assumptions."
Probably not. I would assume that disinformation and misinformation are rife in this ballpark.
My Dissertation Chairman was a Mormon Bishop. One day he was getting his briefcase out of the trunk of his car as we were going into his office to sort through my software program to analyze the Kelly grids for my Dissertation. I noticed his Book of Mormon copies in his trunk and asked him how he reconciled the 5 or so revisions to the Book of Mormon that had purportedly never been changed. He said something that I disagreed with theologically but felt was still factually, generally true in a lot of ways:
"Life is soooo complex, just about any cock-a-may-me explanation will do."He was a super brilliant man who, one time, had presented 20 different papers to the American Psychological Assoc Convention that year. Usually, it was an honor to present one.
So, NO, I do NOT automatically think that all or even necessarily a majority of the OP's here are true or mostly true.
I merely believe that they are useful for consideration for a variety of reasons.
. . .