How do you analyze evidence? - Page 6

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by amnesiac

That's pretty much the case with anything. So what's a newcomer to do - with so many untruths all the way around, how can they sort it all out? I don't think there are probably too many parents that would look at an assortment of conflicting information and assume that the one that is the sloppiest and least professional is most likely to be true.

If you want my opinion I think the answer lies beyond just researching vaccinations, although this is obviously what we are discussing in this forum. We are inundated with untruths in all aspects of our lives, and when you begin to realize this some sort of switch goes on and you begin to see all the deception and manipulation and those fakers are really easy to spot and you can laugh in their face. I realize this won't fly with you, because it isn't scientific.

It's back to the nebulous "knowing" which I said before is beyond mind and thinking.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Aquaduct

I was kind of joking Uccomama. No, he sounds like a man of principle.

By the way I liked what you said about the mind being outside of the physical. This is what I believe. We think by means of our brain, not with our brains. The brain is just a tool of our consciousness.

I believe Galloway is a man of principle too!

I tend to look at the brain as a intel processor. The mind/consciousness is the softwear program and is only as good as the information that is input into it. Knowing (true wisdom) is beyond the body/mind/subconcsious; which is very easy to manipulate, largely through fear.

Again, not much in the way of science to back this up. But going way OT, I thought the research done by a group of Russian scientists on the nature of DNA as a biological internet is very, very interesting. Here's an article, no doubt from a very dodgy website:

http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/...cience/id/4161

The information is from the book Vernetzte Intelligenz by Grazyna Fosar and Franz Bludorf (ISBN 3930243237) which unfortunately is only published in German.

[Aquaduct]

I really relate to your comparison of the brain with a computer (an intel processor is a computer, isn't it?). And we download consciousness. That is why saying mantras and simply thinking of God can work. The thinking of an ideal brings the IDEAL or the Absolute more into our limited consciousness. A kind of downloading occurs. Ultimate Reality will reach out to us.

However we must go beyond thought if we want to reach into ultimate reality. To me this is the untying of a knot that unties all knots. The truth that allows us to know all truths.

This is why science has so many limitations. It is useful up to a degree on the material plane. But as quantum physics is showing us, the observer has an influence on outcomes. There is no such thing as objectivity. Thought or whirlpools of thought (Vritti) forever blind us, until we discipline our minds enough to go beyond them.

So with regard to vaccination, it really helps to realize how unobjective it is as a science. It is far from exact and in some ways to even argue as if it can be exact and verifiable defies wisdom. All outcomes are subject to the egos of the researchers concerned, their limited grasp of reality, their moral inconsistencies such as greed for status and money, their attachments, their conditionings etc. That is why when I analyze any "evidence" I try to be aware of all these variables.

In the final analysis the only "evidence" you can rely on is your own experience. We like to give so much weight to experts, but who is the expert? A mother knows her child so well, and her intuition is so often more accurate than a doctors for example. Go to an optomotrist to get yourself fitted for a pair of spectacles and we are impressed by a fancy machine which slides all these lens in front of our eyes. The "expert" slides all these different lens in front of us, but he is relying on our perceptions of our vision for finding the right lens!! Go out on the streets in India and you'll come across a stallholder hawking lots of used spectacles. He will try out lots of different glasses on until you find the right ones. The process is just the same, and the outcome just as accurate, and you could save yourself a great deal of dosh.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Aquaduct

However we must go beyond thought if we want to reach into ultimate reality. To me this is the untying of a knot that unties all knots. The truth that allows us to know all truths.

YES, YES, YES. I totally believe this is the case.

Originally Posted by Aquaduct

In the final analysis the only "evidence" you can rely on is your own experience. We like to give so much weight to experts, but who is the expert? A mother knows her child so well, and her intuition is so often more accurate than a doctors for example.

However, the problem is that most people are still very much manipulated both consciously and subconsiously, so are trapped in illusion and dominated by the mass program, which is basically fear. To really get to the "truth" one needs to connect to what you call ultimate reality. But then you get labeled crazy, or even worse, because you perceive the world differently.

[Aquaduct]

Yes Amnesiac, I think it is about time you fronted up. We must all have ideas of how we can grasp the truth of things. You give the impression that you see yourself as pretty scientific and objective. But we don't really know what your modus operandi is for evaluating evidence. Everyone has a plan, what's yours? Or will you just simply keep criticizing with that hint of leze-majesty?

[LongIsland]

Originally Posted by Aquaduct

In the final analysis the only "evidence" you can rely on is your own experience. We like to give so much weight to experts, but who is the expert?

Exactly.

Amnesiac, I have just re-read this entire thread. Each of the posters have brought to this thread their own personal "strategies" as it relates to evalutating data/evidence, research, publications, websites, etc. and yet their answers are frustrating you ?????

Yes, "but who is the expert?" Who is the most credible? What is truth? What is the garbage? Is it the CDC? Is it Think Twice? Should I go to a website to help me evaluate? Should I use my common sense? Amnesiac - are you the expert in evaluating evidence? Am I? Is anyone here?

Bottom line: A thousand highly educated, highly respected, critical thinking medical professionals with lots of "credible" titles after their names could throw all the credible analyzed "evidence" in our faces and we still wouldn't vaccinate our kids.

[amnesiac]

I’ve also included in this thread several of the other places I look and strategies I use. Maybe I didn’t type out a lecture detailing every minute detail – I didn’t feel that was necessary. This isn’t about me or anyone else lecturing, it’s about sharing ideas. If there’s something anyone wants me to elaborate on all you have to do is ask. If I weren’t comfortable with questions I wouldn’t ask so many myself.

and yet their answers are frustrating you ?????

Not at all.

Amnesiac - are you the expert in evaluating evidence? Am I? Is anyone here?

Who said anything about being an expert? Certainly not me! That’s the point of sharing – because NONE of us are experts.

Bottom line: A thousand highly educated, highly respected, critical thinking medical professionals with lots of "credible" titles after their names could throw all the credible analyzed "evidence" in our faces and we still wouldn't vaccinate our kids.

[amnesiac]

Uccomama, I think I understand more of what you mean & I can appreciate that.