2020 September Uncategorized

Michael Forest Reinoehl, Suspect in Portland Shooting, Is Killed by Officers – The New York Times

Sorry, couldn’t resist but look at the language…

“ An antifa supporter suspected in the killing of a right-wing activist in Portland, Ore., died when agents moved to arrest him, officials said.“

A “supporter was killed after killing a right-wing activist.”

While we don’t know the whole story, it doesn’t appear to have happened the way it’s been portrayed…

Anyone who is a TRUMP supporter or wears a MAGA hat, stands for the national anthem and says under god is NOW, a right-wing activist…

These people really know what they are doing but you have to wonder if they know what it’s going cause.

Intuitively the future I never wanted has manifest…how does this get better with widespread adoption of either or both of these beliefs?


3 replies on “Michael Forest Reinoehl, Suspect in Portland Shooting, Is Killed by Officers – The New York Times”

Thanks Mike for ruining my day… I just “had” to read that article and one of the first things I thought of was the 3 authors of this article must have had a great time coming up with words to describe Danielson as an evil supporter of the monster trump and the praising words to describe Reinoehl who was just trying to save the world from that evil trump.

I must be a right-wing activist because I still stand for the National Anthem. I guess I need to stop that or take the chance of being attacked by some “nut” job.

Gary Gile

You got to admit these people are good…the worst part of it, however, is they probably believe what they right—so perhaps I’m giving them too much credit.

If you heard his friend’s side of the story—which is by no means the truth either—they weren’t armed and they weren’t necessarily looking for trouble, although today, most trouble is not something you have to look for much;)

We have a clash of beliefs. A clash of civilisation as multiple ideologies compete for fitness and “in the simulation” and humans are getting to decide through trillions of interactions what fitness looks like which is why Graves doesn’t get enough praise for discovering the human psychology is an open Energetic system of dissipating level energy coalesced and attracted by strange or weak attractors into organisational closed systems.

Which means that even as we find stability in these systems at varying levels of conceptual space, the next system serves to disrupt the organisation of that system…

We will never grok that there is no end to how far this can go…

Each organisation of durable, competitive, core values serves a constituency that must both protect itself from being “enslaved” to the next system, or being changed so radically that it drops into chaos and malcontent.

It’s interesting to me that humankind (excepting those who were forced out of existence, which is an interesting premonition) has all the tools to follow multiple pathways in this quest AND if they knew what was happening to them as the early civilisations discovered, they would firewall instead of continuing to adapt which for the 85-95% would be a more appropriate end.

We are beginning to see that idea reinforced more and more today and that living together With everyone may be a less desirable Path of fitness for larger and larger numbers of people?


Ps: army anyone?

Bye the way, I was reading an old piece which was an answer to one of Jim’s questions…

And there was no comment…

In that piece, were some good explanations and basics:

While reading below…

I’m getting around, down, into and through GT-Y.

There is so much recursion required that every time you get somewhere, you find that what got you there won’t keep you there and then you have to go back to zero order primitive beliefs and reconstruct the trees;)

In “Paraposition” which is a term that I’m using now for a host of reasons; paraposition—just the term (allegorical?) is helping move the chess pieces.

A point of note:

In Graves primary research which was detailed 2nd hand By William r lee if memory serves in LEVELS OF EXISTENCE, the original group of conceptions (“psychology of a mature adult” as defined by college students, many older returning to school from the war)…didn’t fall into a line like you see depicted, the data was juried 2x, once by The panel and once by Graves so in remembering that from my PhD work hehe years ago, 2 things “parapostionally” emerge;)

Graves made a mistake and the conceptions don’t flow one after another (blows up sgd); or he/they missed something in the data and they confirmed the model to their thinking (this has implications, as well).

If you go down the rabbit hole while suspended between “waves and particles” (parapositionally?) you can create several futures:

1: makes a stronger case for motive-driven means which coalesce around those motives and become durable which means that we have not only the coalesced basins with (cooperative motive patterns, e.g. CP-RED: low acceptance, at least mid-power, low tranquility…then cooperative motives such as low family, independence, low order, vengeance, and you would see the core bonds tightly and then less tight bonds because the cooperative values may bond with other cores as well; but we can see the polarities, e.g. hot:cold; warm; cool which tend to be a form of energy which “acts” with those combinations.

2. By smashing together vertical development (which they did) they may have created a monster which then doesn’t behave well as a predictor of either individual or collective behavior.

3. Societies/cultures may progress in a manner than could be Construed as vertically linear with expanding conception space but not due to what SGD purports.

4. When you unbraid…or unwind, or more specifically unpack models, the monsters are set free….


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *