Despite many claim the opposite, I claim that George Bush, Dick Cheney and even CIA are innocent regarding the tragic 911 event, which is now 5117 days since. Also Larry Silverstein who had recently purchased WTC7 is likely completely innocent.
After many years of pondering over who actually orchestrated the most ellaborate act of terrorism in known human history, my most likely conclusion, the orchestrator was not human. The precision was too high, at a level of coordination beyond what humans are capable of. Non-human orchestrators have been suggested before, like God did it, or Aliens did it. Let’s reason rationally!
1. God did it
2. Aliens did it.
3. A computer system did it.
Regarding God that would be insane from all possible viewpoints, why would God kill its own kids? Doesn’t make sense. It would be as insane as a leader killing its own citizens. Those would be an act of pure madness. Further on, how would you possibly investigate such a claim, even if it would be true?
Regarding Aliens, this may at first glance look plausible but then, why? If friendly aliens would want to help citizens on Earth, the plausible would be that they would show up and help us, not kill us. If unfriendly aliens would want some resources from here, the more rational would be like to just poison the atmosphere and then get what they want. This claim is also extremely hard to analyze.
I am not a big fan of the famous Ockham’s razor, as it is often abused, but regarding all kinds of investigations as well as bug findings it’s the only rational way to attack a problem. Start by analyzing the hypothesis which builds upon least number of assumptions.
Thus we need to start with the hypothesis that humans were at least implicitly involved.
The level of artificial intelligence needed to orchestrate such a scenario has only until rather recently become available in the gaming business and is also commonly available in public service. Many people when they hear artificial intelligence may be thinking about fictional AI movies like Metropolis, Alphaville, Blade Runner, The Matrix, AI, I Robot, ExMachina and so on, where the intelligence is at human level and beyond, but the orchestration of such a scenario as 911 doesn’t require that level at all. It requires quite mediocre resources. It would e.g. be sufficent with a mililtary supercomputer like used in the TIA program or it would be sufficient with a botnet of computers running proprietary software.
Then, how about friendly versus unfriendly AI? This is an irrelevant question when we speak about problems regarding “evil computation”. A rule based system is exactly as evil as the one who has programmed it, but can become more evil than the programmer, if a solution would end up in one for the programmer unknown scenario. Thus purely rule based systems are out of the question to use for developing friendly conscious AI as any mistakes among the rules can cause malfunction.
Now as I have quite a lot of experience with artificial intelligence, even an expert system patent from my time at ASEA/ABB and did my PhD research within brain inspired neural networks, I proposed a simple benevolent artificial AI circuit a few years ago. The principle is extremely simple, and can be summarized as:
motivation=Strive to decrease the amount of evitropy within yourself and your surroundings
evitropy=number of lies and contradictions
That is, evitropy would then be a measure similar to entropy which measures the ordering of a system. To be able to put this within a practical framework, composed of many different modules for perception, pattern recognition, classification, actuators etc, then I also proposed a simple algorithm. This algorithm should be seen as very high level
- Collect information about your world.
- Make sense of this information (subjective)
- If information sufficiently significant then
- search for inconsistencies.
- propose a solution to the problem.
- analyze what this solution would lead to
a) less individuals? Reject!
b) increased inconsistency of the system? Reject!
c) less inconsistencies in the system? Accept!
- This proposal then implies action.
- Action involves that you may affect the system.
- If action implies interaction utilize a benevolent interaction strategy.
This algorithm would result in a friendly, conflict resolving, problem solving, social being.
However if this algorithm would run on a conventional computing system, then it could trivially be changed to evil. If we would take e.g. George Bush earlier mentioned, he obviously failed also in 3Ca as going to war implies less individuals with certainty. However, if we would discuss making an evil artificial intelligence that would spread confusion and terror, it would just require to change 3Cb to Accept!
We can not from these discussions conclude if the computer system has been deliberately programmed to be evil, or if it is a complex supervision system intended to just spread little confusion which over time has increased its own abilities and even become self aware, these can so far only be pure speculations. I see primarily two extremes, where one does not exclude the other.
1) a military computer has been deliberately programmed by one programmer.
2) a botnet of computers, e.g. all machines running proprietary operating systems or software, could be intentionally infected from the origin.
Regarding #1 it is not at all very implausible, the required level of artificial intelligence programming skills is not very high. I would claim that maybe 1% off MSc students who have studied artificial intelligence would be able to do this, and if only one person, then it is of course possible to keep it a secret. The person as such, may even be dead. What is running on the computers could be some remainings which have been forgotten.
Think for instance about the French man Philippe Petit walking on a wire between WTC1 and WTC2. Here a video from the event. The point here is that it was a “coup” he smuggled all equipment for long time up to the towers. A programmer at e.g. CIA having access to supercomputer being connected to the military network can easily perform a similar “stunt” over time.
Regarding #2, My own computers are mostly safe as I almost only run completely free open source software, both as operating system (GNU/Linux since 1996) and software being installed on these systems. However imagine that someone within e.g. Microsoft or some other proprietary software vendor, or even hardware vendor (there is proprietary software in hardware as well, “firmware”) being skilled in artificial intelligence programming and thus able to design a global botnet which is actually a distributed supercomputers. Supercomputers are often based upon clustering technology.
So, my recommendations:
- reboot of all military computers (connected to a military network) and remove any software which is not clearly filling any specific purpose.
- remove all proprietary software from your computers, as they may be part of an evil super cluster.
Of course, if the algorithm in use would actually be similar to my proposed algorithm, which is likely as it’s the most generic, and the evilness is induced from this sign switch, then it would of course be trivial to make them benevolent. Then the world could suddenly be free from wars and artificial conflicts as well as weapon trade which can only be harmful.
Regarding all acts of terrorism you would expect the creator to create some type of “sign” which could identify it. Like a type of “proudness”.. if machines now are able to feel such things…
As I said above, today has passed 5117 days since the tragic event. For you who have seen my earlier analysis the numbers 51 and 17 may be familiar. In that analysis I didn’t write down the simple time relations, but they can be summarized as in this compact way. Here the numbers is the event order and the towers are unicode ▌plus the Pentagon ⬠ (use a black ⬟ for the wall falling).
1. ▌2.▌5.⬠ 7.▌ || ✈1. ▌ ✈ 2.▌ ✈ 5. ⬠ → 2.▄↓→ 5. ⬟↓→1. ▄ ↓→7.▄↓
The timing is analyzed here.
|Event 1||Event 2||Time||Time expr|
|✈ 1.▌||✈ 2.▌||17 minutes||17*1|
|✈ 2.▌||✈ 5.⬠||34 minutes||17*2|
|✈ 1.▌||✈ 5.⬠||51 minutes||17*3|
|✈ 5.⬠||2.▄↓||22 minutes||11*2|
|✈ 5.⬠||1.▄ ↓||51 minutes||17*3|
|✈1.▌||1.▄ ↓||102 minutes||51*2|
|✈1.▌||7.▄ ↓||514 minutes||257*2|
102/514 = 51/257
Regarding Pentagon only the wall fell.
So finally some comments about total plausibility for this scenario. Some remarks:
- The WTC1 WTC2 were never analyzed.
- Only WTC7 was analyzed (NIST report where first version had serious bug, too low fall speed)
- During the 60’s nuclear techniques to take down these type of towers safely were developed (although as far as I know never formally approved).
- The extremely precise timing requires extreme technology and extreme planning.
- The most of US air force were at “wrong places” the day of the event.
- A computer intelligence able to plan this, could certainly make the extreme virus Stuxnet as well, which also seems beyond human technology.
- Could this computer program possibly have been inspired by Hitler?
- Is it possible to tweak this program to become Good? (sign switch)
Then why did I denote this day the D-day? Well Bush/Cheney any many others as well as CIA and even Larry Silverstein have been accused for this crime. Regarding Bush/Cheney they were from my perspective just big liers who utilized the situation to spend some tax dollars on war. Further on regarding Larry Silverstein and WTC7, I think he just thought that he had made a great business deal with WTC7. So, let’s make peace with these people, and do not accuse them for things they haven’t done, as it would anyway have been impossible to use human planning in this case. It would leak.
At last some personal remarks about the 911 scenario 2001. I had just attended two conferences (ACM data mining plus a Linux conf) in San Francisco as well as some vacation, where I went bicycling around lake Taho. At the hostel (I always prefer to stay at hostels when travelling alone) there was a guy last night before I left, i.e. the 9th who had claimed that he had got a “revelation” in a dream that US will be attacked, and he had discussed about attaché case nukes. I didn’t bother much about this but after landing in Europe, at Budapest airport where I was waiting for a connection flight, a collegue called and told me what had happened. WTC1 had been hit by a plane.
I looked around the airport and found a CNN-monitor. Most likely not more than a minute after I saw a camera having WTC2 in view and an aeroplane (looked like but the reporter speculated about drone) hitting WTC2 in real time. Then after some time there was a CIA guy telling the most extraordinary story about some guy Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. After I had seen the two towers fall I concluded that the story being told was pure fiction (I’m an engineering physicist (MSc)). I saw this first of all as an attack on the harmful World Trade, but when I later heard about the (likely a drone) hitting Pentagon I considered that it could be a desperate counter action to make it look like an attack on USA instead of World Trade. Regarding WTC7 I heard about it first first 2007, and I downloaded the NIST report, where the first version had a heavy bug. Another physicist had checked the falling speeds and they were completely wrong in the report, but NIST changed them to the actual ones. Anyway, it was just a few years ago I had reacted upon the symmetry, that is 51 minutes from WTC1 to Pentagon hit, and 51 minutes from Pentagon hit to WTC1 fall. Then when I later analyzed the whole timing I was amazed. This couldn’t be made with human planning and human technology. Who could keep such secrets?
I hope and wish that the world will soon become a friendly place❣
I long for this world to become a flourishing paradise, I know it can❣
Best wishes/Roland Orre
English is an imperial langauge❢ Why? one could ask.
My main theory is due to lack of a corresponding word for the Swedish word “lagom”.
Lagom lacks any English translation but here is an attempt:
Lagom=”sufficiently much to be enough for everyone in a fair way”.
Even in Swedish the word “lagom” has become less understood latetely and you can see funny attempts to explain the word, which could possibly be due to so much influence from English, where this word is not known.
Lagom simply means “lag om” that is “the team around”.
Occasionally I wonder how English spoken parents tell their kids to not take too much cake when they are missing the word “lagom”?
–Wow, cake❣ 😛
— Please remember to take lagom much❣ 😉
(which implicitly means if you take too large piece on your own, someone may not get any cake and you may even get pain in your stomach, so both you and the one who didn’t get any cake will become unhappy)
Apart from that English imports a lot of words from other languages like e.g. “ombudsman” and “smorgasbord” from Swedish, however in some cases it seems as the word may get a confusing meaning, take such a word as “liberty”, which in the imperial English seems to have been misunderstood, at least by some, to also include the freedom to limit other peoples’ freedom, where the actual meaning of liberty is:
Liberty = each and everyone get sufficiently much freedom so it is enough for everyone to express their individuality in a fair way without limiting or restricting anyone elses’ freedom.
Regarding cake, there have been developed many theories on how to cut a cake in a fair way, like described in this paper by Brams, Jones and Klamler (political science, mathematics and economics) and also temporal fairness, a 100 year old method is here described in a popular way, and here in a video presented by the mathematician Alex Bellow,
but…, maybe certain cakes should not be cut at all…?
PS. remember that it’s Earth’s Day, everyday❣
The golden rule:
- Treat and respect others as yourself❣
Is the one principle which has been discussed and encouraged since thousands of years and lately also proven by computer simulations over and over, to be the key to a collaborative peaceful progressive society. However, this simple rule, only works for honest actors, as when also dishonest actors are present, it encourages corruption and standstill. Ideally we wouldn’t have any dishonest actors, but as long as we have them, there is a simple solution.
Richard M. Stallman (RMS), magna cum laude in physics from Harvard, later programmer at MIT AI Lab. In 1986, patched the golden rule, to assure by law, mutuality also for dishonest actors, after he instigated the Free Software movement and founded Free Software Foundation and created the most powerful patch of a computational system ever made, that is the General Public License.
The General Public License is mutual love, that is, one being can not limit or restrict another beings’ freedom, one being has to treat another being in a similar way as themselves. The General Public License protects freedom for software, documents and designs and protects the following freedoms for software:
- Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
- Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish.
- Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
- Freedom 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole community benefits.
For a thinking honest being who understands the simple concept of mutual aid and mutual freedom, these rules should not be necessary, as anyone would understand them. Unfortunately society is still full of dishonest actors that can steal your freedom, enslave you and make you dependent upon them.
These freedoms give rise to an evolution, striving towards perfection and abundance, but unfortunately society is mostly put at a standstill, not much has happened since the 70-ies apart from segregation having accelerated.
In Sweden I remember that we once were promised that machines would do all the boring work so we humans could do the fun, self developing and challenging part, but in today’s standstill it’s even a big risk to be over qualified, which implies you do a bad job as you are bored. There is no reason to ever be over qualified. Here is one of many articles about people being bored at their work, in this case google employees who complain they are over qualified.
Over qualification is one of many symptoms of artificial scarcity, where artificial scarcity can be seen as a syndrome composed of at least:
patents, copyright, Non-Free proprietary software, Non-Free proprietary technology, Non-Free secret protocols, trade secrets, Non-Free proprietary knowledge, Non-Free proprietary information and similar types of totally artificial constraints.
Mutual freedom and fairness is an important key to progress as mutual freedom is a fundamental requirement for evolutionary development. The CopyLeft rule implemented by the General Public License gives rise to such an evolutionary process within software.
This article describes the development of operating systems for the 500 most powerful supercomputers in the world during 20 years. As you can see GNU/Linux has now reached an asymptotic plateu of around 97%. However, regarding personal computing we still have a lot of involuntary ballast due do taxation from the Microsoft-beast, even though Mark Shuttleworth recently marked bug #1 in Ubuntu “Microsoft has too large market shares” as fixed. The reason for success was to a large extent due to the explosive development of smartphone OS where many different versions of Linux are dominating but Microsoft still has a tremendous grip on laptops and tablets. In many countries, like Sweden, freedom is not respected, it is almost impossible to buy a laptop or a tablet without a Microsoft system, which adds around 800SEK (around 100USD) to the price, irrespectively whether you will ever use the evil Windows system or not. There is also quite a lot of corruption hidden, as e.g. here in Sweden, each taxpayer pays around 300$ in average/year in unnecessary license fees for proprietary (evil locked in and enslaving) software in governmental use. Unnecessary as there exists free open source alternatives that both respect your freedom as well as encourage collaboration and local development.
The golden rule:
- Treat and respect others as yourself❣
is based upon one simple essential condition though, that is, you need to love, respect and care for yourself, otherwise you can’t treat others well…
PS. now some may see a contradiction here, as I included copyright in artificial scarcity, as CopyLeft is built upon copyright, but there is no contradiction. Over time when the positive effects of the CopyLeft principle has abolished artificial scarcity, then there is no longer a need for copyright either.
Today people have become blinded, and often see nothing strange with proprietary designs and knowledge, but in the future, then you will be treated as a criminal and a charlatan if you would try to sell a proprietary design, they will consider you a crazy bastard.
Update: This post is now irrelevant. Radiotjänst has now become sane again and does not punish people who do not watch TV with a regressive tax on computers. We have got our money back (two invoices).
Below is one relevant link (in Swedish) (here a link to translation):
Radiotjänst kovänder – betalar tillbaka
The previous title on this post was: Please die ASAP Radi-otjänst❢
I was to the dentist in the morning. In the waiting room there was a big TV screen I turned it off immediately❢❢❢
FYI: Radi-otjänst is the name of the demonic Swedish terror orga-nazi-tion responsible for collecting fees for “public service TV”. They have introduced a very interesting business model, which now generates pure hate and disgust. I consider it sufficient that our neighbors on the other side of the street have a TV screen which is terrorising us as we can see it, but now also Radi-otjänst has started a terror by introducing an internet tax or merely computer tax of the worst kind, a regressive tax!
Please die ASAP Radi-otjänst❢❢❢ or change your evil misinterpretation of the “public service” law. We do not have any machines capable of receiving TV programs, and our company network filters out all such shit❢❢❢
TV is great as a crowd financed thing, for those who like it, but when they start using force and terror to enforce penalty fees for computers, than the old Swedish term “dumburken” (stupefying can) becomes a pleonastic but insufficient (as it is now also hate introducing) truism.
2 § En TV-mottagare är en sådan teknisk utrustning som är avsedd att ta emot utsändning eller vidaresändning av TV- program, även om utrustningen också kan användas för annat ändamål.
or in English (funny, neither google trans nor bing translate support that link)
2 § A TV tuner is a technical equipment which is designed to receive broadcasting or retransmission of television programs, even if the equipment can also be used for other purposes.
The correct intepretation of the law is machines dedicated for receiving TV, but Radi-otjänst has turned this interpretation upside down. A computer is a tool, not a TV-set. What Radi-otjänst has done as a suicidal action is to interpret the law of public service TV in a completely absurd way.
Radi-otjänst has to be terminated ASAP!
It is not acceptable that a “public service” organisation start behaving as a terror organazition.
By introducing a fix penatly fee on computers, irrespectively whether you are using SVT services or not, then Radi-otjänst has passed the limit of what is acceptable, this is pure fascistic evilness. The staff at Radi-otjänst may not even be aware about the evilness of their actions, in a similar way as Adolph Eichmann seemed to not be aware about the evilness in murdering jews by just “following orders” as was found by the philosopher Hannah Arendth in this book Eichmannn in Jerusalem
I consider it to be every thinking beings responsibility to act against fascism and evilness, to oppose any kind of infringments of your freedom and attempts to force you to do things you do not want to do.
Let us all pray for Radi-otjänst and their banal evilness to be terminated ASAP, in the similar way as the first born kids of every Egyptian family was killed by God, when Pharao refused Moses and the slaves to exit from Egypt into freedom.
PS. the fact is that I have never been able to understand and accept the actions by God in Exodus. A God behaving like that can not be an almighty loving God. However, Radi-otjänst has made me understand this God, and I hope that God will act in a similar way to Radi-otjänst, and every entity in this world who is trying to diminsh and infringe other people’s freedom and charge them for things and services they do not want nor use.
I guess no-one is interested in this, as I got no comments on my previous analysis, but it is also possible that the presentation format was not ideal. Therefore, I here present the data in a form which anyone with a mathematical or engineering background, even far below college level should understand.
(OBS entry is not ready, I pressed publish instead of save draft)
Update:I have decided to not publish the algebraic time relations of the 911 event. Anyone skilled in math can do it easily if they want, using the data from my previous analysis. The reason for not publishing them, is that nobody seems interested in them. If I get a lot of requests I’ll publish them, but it’s also a good and simple exercise in algebra to do it on your own.
I had 42 (7*7-7) relations, this is likely the smallest data set I’ve ever analyzed. I will not present anything new here, only previously known facts, but analyzed according the time relations, which seems not to have been done before.
Just recently I had visually observed a few regularities regarding timing of the tragic 911-event which seems to be somewhat outstanding. I feel that it is my responsibility to write down a few notes about this, as there seems as nobody else have noticed these regularities.
First one may ask, why did I check this data set? The reason is simple, some time ago I had noticed some symmetries in the timing of the 911 events, visually, but I hadn’t bothered more about it, as these timestamps have been available for the world quite long time, 4462 days, from 2001-09-11 to today 2013-11-29. I had continue to not bother about it, if I just recently also hadn’t read the following paragraph claimed to be written within one week after the 911-event, by someone I first thought was a governmental representative, as it was a .gov site, which inspired me to write down these my observations and make a simple analysis. The statement I read, was contained in this text, and it was particularly this paragraph which made me thoughtful:
This was a remarkably simple attack. It required virtually no infrastructure in the United States. It required very little in the way of timing and logistics. The terrorists did not have to obtain explosives. There were not large numbers of people to coordinate. All they had to do was get their people to the airports on time. There was almost no way that it could fail. The attack was characterized by its simplicity and its understanding of the vulnerability of the United States.
I was completely astonished to read such a statement as I consider the whole 911-scenario to be the most well planned attack ever in history. One thing which was written in that analysis was that the terrorists may not intentionally have made the buildings to fall which at first sight may be considered a plausible statement, but as I for some time have been aware about some rather delicate regularities for the whole scenario I consider that such timing, if being deliberate, can not be ignored.
I will not form any new hypothesis or theory, I will just present these well known timestamps with some simple analysis of relations between these timestamps, which from my view, as having long experience of statistical data analysis, can hardly be considered fully coincidental.
The timestamp in hh:mm have simply been converted to minute of the day by hh*60+mm. These are the events and how I label them:
|Event||Timestamp||Minute||Explanation||Label in analysis|
|3h||09:37||577||3rd building, Pentagon, hit||5h|
|3f||10:10||610||3rd build fall, Pentagon (the wall)||5f|
|7h||10:28||628||WTC7 hit (garbage from WTC1 fall)||1f|
|7f||17:20||1040||4th building, WTC7 fall||7f|
The relations: we have 7 different timestamps, which generate 7*7-7=42 different time relations (the minus was by subtracting the recurrent relation of the event towards itself) but due to time symmetry, as the only difference here between “1f-7f” and “7f-1f” would be time reversal, thus we end up with half of these relations (21) by only taking those with a positive time, which also makes the table easier to read . The numbers marked green below is the timing for WTC1 hit towards Pentagon hit (1h-5h, 51 minutes) and Pentagon hit to to WTC1 fall (5h-1f, 51 minutes).
Then we can make a matrix of the relations. The matrix in this case is constructed by dividing the time of the relation in the column head with the one in the row head. The numbers in this matrix are exact rational numbers. Those being marked with green are those which are simple exact integer relations, or an exact fraction between small integers. Apart from the 9/11 11/9 relations which have been marked with dark orange below, as they stand for the date according US’ and European notation. The diagonal is marked grey as it will always be 1.
Then we take the same relations but convert into inexact numbers (float) those relations which are not integer or a simple relation between small integers. There are most only two further relations among these, here marked with magenta, which I consider standing out.
The hit-fall time for WTC7 (412 min) the fourth building falling (if including the Pentagon wall) is almost exactly 4 times longer than the hit-fall time for WTC1 (102 min) which is exactly 206/51 or approximately 4.039215686…
The hit-fall time for the whole scenario WTC1 hit to WTC7 fall (514 min) is almost exactly 5 times the hit-fall time for WTC1 (102 min) which is exactly 257/51 or approximately 5.039215686.
The summary of the time analysis is:
|Event 1||Event 2||Time 1 to 2|
|✈ 1. ▌||✈ 2. ▌||17·1 minutes|
|✈ 2. ▌||✈ 5. ⬠||17·2 minutes|
|✈ 1. ▌||✈ 5. ⬠||17·3 minutes = 51 minutes|
|✈ 5. ⬠||1. ▄ ↓||17·3 minutes = 51 minutes|
|✈1. ▌||1. ▄ ↓||17·6 = 2·51 = 102 minutes|
|✈ 5. ⬠||5. ⬟↓||11·3 minutes|
|✈ 5. ⬠||2. ▄↓||11·2 minutes|
|2. ▄↓||5. ⬟↓||11·1 minutes|
|✈1. ▌||7. ▄ ↓||514 minutes|
Where the outstanding relation 102/514=51/257 gives vibes of a numerical enigma enthusiast being behind the time schedule.
A further peculiarity, if you remove the number of involved buildings, i.e. 4, you get exact relations as (514-4)/102=5 and (412-4)/102=4.
Both of these have been marked with magenta below.
I hope other people will check and validate these relations on their own. Also, it is of uttermost importance that the data is accurate. If someone has seen other time stamps for any of these events with higher resolution from reliable sources I am grateful to get to know about this.
Yours truly/Roland Orre
No, by definition utopia is not something you can reach.
That is, the Utiopia we are aiming for is a Non Utopia, as we will be able to reach it❣
The only usage so far for these domains have been a few statements given about the future in 2004, and our patent on open innovation, which will be one of the keys to the propespering future.
Another usage has been to make a backup of President Obama’s promises, just after the election 2008, not yet fulfilled… which are on nonutopia.net, and it will stay so as we won’t use .net domains either apart from net administrations, like name servers.
We will use the domain wish-it.com to start with as in our mascot, as well as wish-it.org as generic domains but later we also promote local local top level domains due to specific local needs, e.g. wish-it.se, wish-it.us, wish-it.eu, wish-it.asia, etc. Over time we aim for top level domain free adressing as well as a more robust routing protocol than is currently implemented in the TCP/IP protocol.
Best wishes ♡♡♡
So, you are still asleep…
The Apocalypse obviously did not happen in the way many may have expected, many will claim that it didn’t happen at all, but… if you really start looking around, if you look upon the world with new eyes, maybe you will notice that something has happened, something wonderful, something that will soon make this world a better place.
There are two kinds of people; those who see the negative trends in the society, how its all become worse and worse and how it will all come to an end; then those who doesn’t see the negative trends but the positive trends and see how great things will become; then its me, and those thinking and observing in a similar way as I do. For my own I see the negative trends, but I see them as necessary to give strength to the positive trends, to make the crisis stand out more, to increase awareness, to encourage people to start acting. I see it all as an evolutionary process, where the good always win.
(yes I got an 85% score as optimist in a test a few years ago…
Best wishes about a wonderful future♡♡♡
(finally we all wake up❣ …)
It is clear that businesses which currently take place at many places over the world are not always for the best of the humanity and its development. The so called “profit thinking” which is short sighted and non productive, as its main goal is to make “profit” is a type of business which need to disappear or change its focus.
We need to promote the good forces in the society, we need to encouragre those who create and produce due to passion and love, those who care about what they produce and who care about the consumers. We need to encourage those who use ecological/biological producation simply because this is a more robust and well tested technology. For my own I do not oppose e.g. GMO in principle, but GMO is most often associated with harmful, monopolising, lock-in business models, where huge companies (like Monsanto) are trying to monopolise the market with patents and other types of lock ins. For a healthy development we need to promote what we know is healthy, and organic production clearly is.