First, the only reason I was actually listening to him again lately was because of this thread - because he has cancer, I saw Dolan interviewed him, and I admit I felt sorry for him. I was fully aware of the "history" with him as L has described, but I was also "curious" to see what Clif and Rich might be talking about these days.
As to what he actually said in the video: he resents little f-tards that say that Gearson therapy cured their cancer. So, cancel my previous claim! My mistake. Vit C is part of Gearson therapy, but so is juicing and organic foods, other vitamins, etc.
As for this part:
It's rather difficult to take him seriously when he starts by saying that one must rationally analyze things and pay attention lest we become like roadkill, and then he subsequently starts "F-tarding" people - PTSD or not.
I get it that he's upset, has cancer, and obviously the Gearson thing won't work for him, but that doesn't mean it didn't work for other people. And it's quite possible that there is more backstory that I'm not aware of. Maybe somebody attacked him or whatever. At the same time, I can't ignore his track record, which IMO isn't too good in multiple respects as we've already noted.
I think my reaction to him stemmed from this:
Like Scottie, I found it almost impossible to listen to the guy because he made so many sounds with his mouth, and said so little of any import, that I found my brain just turning to mush listening to him.
That's pretty much it. I've been observing this lately from various angles, and it's pretty interesting. That is exactly how some people react to me and some things I've said in my YT videos (the controversial stuff like 5G/WiFi). Stop making crazy noises with your mouth, you're talking gibberish, I feel dumber now, insults, etc.
Then again, there are a ton of other people who obviously get something out of what I am saying, they are supportive, ask for help with things, etc. Instead of complaining about "mouth noises" or "ums" or whatever, they will also often tell me what a soothing, calm voice I have! Well, that's just WEIRD because that is NOT how I sound in my own head! And it's totally at odds with what these other people are saying. The same is true of, say, Joe and Niall's vids and podcasts over the years.
So what I've been thinking is that it works in two directions:
1. If you cannot "hear" what a person is saying due to your own lack of knowledge, emotional investment, and so on, then your brain turns to mush. In this case, they are saying something true or more closer to reality, at least at that time. Since you are not "ready" or able to hear it, you react emotionally to push them away, misinterpret what they are saying, etc. We see this
A LOT today.
2. If you cannot "hear" what a person is saying because of
their lack of knowledge or their emotional investment, then there is a similar defense mechanism that kicks in, and your brain turns to mush. More often, you are aware that your brain is mushifying, but in many cases your response will still be more of an emotional reaction that again pushes you away from them. IOW, they are NOT saying something true, but something that is a lie, that increases entropy, disperses information instead of concentrating it, or however you want to put it.
Option #2 could be due to the person's word salad, background processing of information archived long ago, a "blink", or even an intuition. In all cases, the more emotional reaction is pretty much your brain taking a shortcut and efficiently getting you moved on to more important things with a minimal amount of energy expenditure.
Of course, in both options, the
best thing to do is to collect all the actual data and present a nice, complete, well-reasoned argument. But that requires WAY more energy to analyze (or re-analyze) everything, write it all out, blah blah blah.
My original f-tard post was factually wrong, but the intention was to warn people off. Well, obviously I could have done a better job, because here I am again writing even more!
At the same time, this thread is now 42 pages long, and I doubt many newer people here have gone back to re-read all the posts, starting with the first post from 10 years ago!!! That's very time consuming, and there are other more important topics to look into these days. Those of us who've been around awhile look at it again quickly, and go, "Nope! More of the same. ABORT! AVOID! RUN, LUKE, RUN!"
IMO Clif's work is almost sad when you think about it. Here's a guy doing "big data" type processing, supposedly for good. Yet what effect has it actually had? And what about Big Data in the form of this forum + SOTT, which isn't just some program that spits stuff out, it gets interpreted, and then we sell it. Instead, it's lots of people doing lots of work, lots of reading, lots of research, learning, sharing, refining theories, struggling to see the world more clearly while they purge themselves of their own rose-colored glasses, etc.
You can't program something like that, and you certainly can't do it alone. Even doing C's sessions requires time, lots of energy, and hard work - and that's just on our little 3d realm.
THAT is the Good Guys version of Big Data, IMO. Except I think we should call it Big Information
TM.
That gives me an idea though: We can start giving tours of the bookcases here in the house so that people can
begin to get an idea of just how many books Laura has read...
Pierre:
"Don't worry, Laura. I gonna build you more bookcases!"
Good thing he's still taking vitamin C I guess.
Seems to me that Clif High's '"data sets" are merely the product of him free associating when looking at the information generated by web crawler bots. It's fun for listeners, I suppose, kind of like a sci-fi novel, but it's beyond me why anyone gives this guy any credence.
