Radiological Mind Control

[Stryder]

Do you or Does someone you know suffer from Radiological Mind Control?

The reason for the thread title is really just about an actual poll to reflect how many people are actually directly effected by either suffering or knowing people that suffer misuse or believe they suffer misuse through Radiological Mind Control.

I haven't used any of the conspiracy related terms like M.I.N.D, HAARP, MKULTRA, Manchurian candidates or any other such terminology because for the most part these are what people have created and attempt to rationalise their observations with, it doesn't always mean that that their assumption is however correct.

I'm trying to find out some rough numbers of people that suffer to see if there is actually a large number or not, after all if it's just a medical condition then there should be hundreds of thousands of sufferers of this disorder, however I'm pretty sure that the actual number of people claiming this is actually far lower, suggesting the number is small because it's artificially created.

I ask any sufferers to join the @ NeurohackOrg twitter channel because if the figures prove high enough, then there is a potential that I can look into establishing a Charity to help Investigate and Aid victims. (Currently there is no point establishing one without some statistical analysis being made)

 

[cosmictraveler]

In 1997 the National Cancer Institute (NCI) released a report published in the New England Journal of Medicine, the result of a seven-year epidemiological investigation. The study investigated 638 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and 620 controls and concluded that their study provided "little evidence that living in homes characterized by high measured time-weighted average magnetic-field levels or by the highest wire-code category increases the risk of ALL in children."[31] Following the report, the US Department of Energy disbanded the EMF Research and Public Information Dissemination (RAPID) Program, saying that its services were no longer needed.[32]

In 2005, the Canadian Federal-Provincial-Territorial Radiation Protection Committee said, "The outcome of a recently conducted pooled analysis of several epidemiological studies shows a two-fold increase in the risk of leukemia in children living in homes, where the average magnetic field levels are greater than 0.4 microtesla (4 milligauss). [However,] it is the opinion of [this committee] that the epidemiological evidence to date is not strong enough to justify a conclusion that EMFs in Canadian homes, regardless of locations from power lines, cause leukemia in children."[33]

The World Health Organization issued a fact sheet, No. 322, in June, 2007 based on the findings of a WHO work group (2007), the IARC (2002) and the ICNIRP (2003), which reviewed research conducted since the earlier publication. The fact sheet says "that there are no substantive health issues related to ELF electric fields at levels generally encountered by members of the public." For ELF magnetic fields, the fact sheet says, "the evidence related to childhood leukaemia is not strong enough to be considered causal", and "[as regards] other childhood cancers, cancers in adults, ... The WHO Task Group concluded that scientific evidence supporting an association between ELF magnetic field exposure and all of these health effects is much weaker than for childhood leukaemia. In some instances (i.e., for ... breast cancer) the evidence suggests that these fields do not cause them."[16]

According to Dr. Lakshmikumar at the National Physical Laboratory, India, a direct, causal, link between RF radiation and cancer (including leukemia) would require one to be "willing to discard Planck's Law… and the entire body of quantum physics." [34]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health

 

[Enmos]

Do you or Does someone you know suffer from Radiological Mind Control?

Uh, no.

 

[origin]

I could not answer the poll because you didn't include the choice, "WTF are you talking about?"

 

[spidergoat]

Yes, in fact all my actions and thoughts including involuntary bodily functions are controlled remotely.

 

[michael_taylor]

The reason for the thread title is really just about an actual poll to reflect how many people are actually directly effected

How do you propose to tell the difference between people who are affected and those who just say they are or think they are, but actually aren't?

As soon as you determine that, the question will pretty much answer itself.

 

[Stryder]

I could not answer the poll because you didn't include the choice, "WTF are you talking about?"

That's because if you don't know then you should just ask.

There are a number of people out there that either are or believe they are being misused through radiology. Perhaps they'll claim telepathy, aliens, governments projects, cult groups. There is a large number of claimed reasons with no real current definitive explanation, other than those supplied by Psychiatrists that to be perfectly honest "Are out of touch with the times".

Obviously not everyone that "hears voices", "telepathically communicates" or believes some handler is controlling them is actually going to be a subject of misuse, however without proper investigation the truth will never truly materialize.

Science after all is about "Empirical Evidence", so rather than having here say and speculation, I'm actually attempting to gather evidence. The first step of evidence collection however is one that addresses the simplest of points, "Will I be wasting my time?"

For that to be worked out I have to identify how many people out there suffer this occurrence, how many have actually had proper investigation or people take them serious enough to look into it. By knowing the number effected, it can be worked out if it is viable to create a group to help people or if the number is so small that such a group wouldn't be viable.

(Part of the investigation is that for a group to deal with such problems it will have to be of a significant enough number, otherwise the cases are of such a rarity that it itself wouldn't factor in with projected natural occurrences through psychiatric issues alone.)

 

[Stryder]

How do you propose to tell the difference between people who are affected and those who just say they are or think they are, but actually aren't?

As soon as you determine that, the question will pretty much answer itself.

The obvious points are that if a person claims they are misused, they "could" just be delusional, however the posed "delusion" will likely fall into certain testable methods to identify that they aren't right if they are delusional or are partially right about what they have been through.

The main problem is that while people are suffering from such effects they tend to be ostracised by their friends and family and find it increasingly hard to interact with people as "normal" people tend to want to ignore them or tell them to go away.

There is also the problem that their observations of their effects will include a great deal of their own divination, namely if they feel a sharp shooting pain while walking they might assume it's involved with the concern of mind control or remote surveillance, the reality might well prove that the shooting pain is completely disconnected from their posed delusion, however it doesn't necessarily mean that part of their posed delusion doesn't have some truth behind it.

Like I've pointed out in the initial post, currently I am just trying to get a rough number, an estimate, to the number of people effected. If the number is high enough then I can start pressing towards looking into better investigation into peoples claims.

After all if there is only 100 people worldwide that claim to be misused, then there isn't much of a call for funding an investigation.

 

[origin]

Should we also test people who think they are Nepoleon, just to see if maybe some of them really are Nepoleon?

Sorry, but this is exceedingly silly.

 

[RichW9090]

Well, Stryder, I suppose this isn't really any different from the mindless Creationism you used to espouse.

The reason for the thread title is really just about an actual poll to reflect how many people are actually directly effected by either suffering or knowing people that suffer misuse or believe they suffer misuse through Radiological Mind Control

A poll simply can't determine that. It can only determine how many people are gullible enough to actually believe that they are under some form of mind-control.

Of course, if mind-control actually worked, we'd instuct the victims to be totally unaware of it, and to deny it if asked.

A bit of rational thinking would go a long way here

Rich

PS, my apologies if you are not the "Stryder" I think you are.

 

[Stryder]

A poll simply can't determine that. It can only determine how many people are gullible enough to actually believe that they are under some form of mind-control.

A poll is just an ice-breaking point, admittedly the numbers themselves can't reflect the true numbers what they can however do is reflect that there are actually people out there that do have this happen, it identifies that they aren't alone and that people are attempting to look into how to help them as well as those Doctors and Psychiatrists that are currently blinded to this (since they assume it to just be psychological).

Incidentally the sort of "Mind Control" I refer to can cover having a "Monologue" auditory input that internal to a person and will seemingly be identified as yourself, the problem is that such a monologue can actually be artificial input, which means over time a person might come to trust that monologue as themselves. This is the simplest form of one-to-one bonding that an agency or group can use to manipulate an asset, while knowing what the asset thinks or feels since they've sculptured it at their end and projected to the individual.

Such monologues are easily called out with some people because they might try to "groom" a person to do something they are physically repulsed by, for instance become a homosexual or consider something of a sexual nature. This can generate an "emotional" paradox, whereby the person is disgusted at this parody, which in turn causes them to become distressed which effects their breathing, their heart rate, if they are angry etc. Those effects can be observed, a simple experiment to prove how would be using an Infra-Red Camera to observe the temperature of a person normally and how it can elevate or decline when distressed.

The problem is that if these monologue systems are harbingered early on in a persons adolescence, it's possible that they won't be able to see a difference between themselves and it.

PS, my apologies if you are not the "Stryder" I think you are.

I doubt I am that "Stryder" if you are implying one that frequents other boards, I tend to run with a slightly different username (my Original name which was here as well of "Stryderunknown") It is however possible that I might of commented on something which would of seemed "Odd" or even "Deranged", however for the most part when that occurs it's merely down to a mixture of my own "tangle with words" and tardy approach to reflect sense from them.

Incidentally I am not Religious although I have argued that Creationism vs Darwinism is flawed because if we evolve to the point of using technology and control over our own universe we won't be gods but we will be programming evolution to mirror what we think we know, so in essence they are both right and wrong.

 

[michael_taylor]

[...]

To me that just sounds like a repetition of your initial unfounded assumptions.

To establish "how" you must first eastablish "if".

When your answer to "if" is actually just a series of speculations about "how", you haven't actually answered it at all.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that the assumptions you're making have a basis in fact? If there isn't (there isn't), how do you know these people are not just plagued by leprechauns?

 

[James R]

Stryder:

There are a number of people out there that either are or believe they are being misused through radiology. Perhaps they'll claim telepathy, aliens, governments projects, cult groups.

And perhaps they'll claim that little pixies visit them and put ideas into their heads.

You're putting the cart before the horse here. First you need to establish that such a thing as "radiological mind control" is possible at all. Then you can start investigating how widespread it might be. If it turns out not to be possible, then it really doesn't matter how many people claim it as a fanciful explanation of their experiences. It's useless as a way to progress knowledge of real causes.

If I were you, I'd start by trying to precisely define "radiological mind control". If it can be telepathy or aliens or government radio waves broadcast into your mind etc. then it's a fairly non-specific catch-all term that will be incredibly hard to investigate. You need to break it down into pieces. Is telepathy possible? Do aliens exist and can they control minds (and if so, how)? Can minds be controlled with radio waves? etc.

There is a large number of claimed reasons with no real current definitive explanation, other than those supplied by Psychiatrists that to be perfectly honest "Are out of touch with the times".

You're jumping to premature conclusions again, since you have no systematic evidence that ANY of the "claimed reasons" are plausible. Nor have you given us any reason to believe your claims that psychiatrists are out of touch.

Obviously not everyone that "hears voices", "telepathically communicates" or believes some handler is controlling them is actually going to be a subject of misuse, however without proper investigation the truth will never truly materialize.

Right.

Science after all is about "Empirical Evidence", so rather than having here say and speculation, I'm actually attempting to gather evidence. The first step of evidence collection however is one that addresses the simplest of points, "Will I be wasting my time?"

For that to be worked out I have to identify how many people out there suffer this occurrence, how many have actually had proper investigation or people take them serious enough to look into it.

But you're asking people to jump to conclusions before they even know what you're talking about. You have to establish the phenomenon first.

 

[Chipz]

Stryder:
You're putting the cart before the horse here. First you need to establish that such a thing as "radiological mind control" is possible at all. Then you can start investigating how widespread it might be. If it turns out not to be possible, then it really doesn't matter how many people claim it as a fanciful explanation of their experiences. It's useless as a way to progress knowledge of real causes.

This sounds like the perspective of a physicist rather than one in the medical profession. It would have been tough to prove AIDS could exist before establish something did which was latter termed AIDS. They saw an anomalous number of cases in this case which we clearly don't see with this theoretical ailment of radiological mind control. It seems somewhat ironic that we're seeing a few people claiming that something could exist through poorly practiced scientific proof, and then incorrectly ascribed to an assortment of instances. Perhaps it's not without precedent and someone could cite a historic example.

 

[Stryder]

To me that just sounds like a repetition of your initial unfounded assumptions.

To establish "how" you must first eastablish "if".

This is part of the problem that can only be resolved in two ways, either;

Create a system that supposedly doesn't already exist,

or;

Prove a system already exists.

In either case it's not particular easy, in fact it's not suppose to be otherwise everyone would be doing it. After all imagine having every cashier handing you extra change, or manipulating a winning streak by having an external card counter at the Card table etc.

In essence there is always going to be people attempting to make sure it isn't possible or at least not observed as being possible so as to lessen how the world itself can be cheated.

I'm going to go into a little detail, however I can't give you any Links to specific journals currently:

Now to create it requires obviously GPS (The Global Positioning System), after all without identifying position you can't follow a mark. The system obviously requires matricing the overall area, not just the individual. Such matricing is a constant system and the individual itself just requires diffusion from the environment (Diffusion in this instance is the term use for "Squelching" or modulating the raw data to assimilate the individuals characteristics from what inprint they've had within the matriced environment). Observations through a matricing system are obviously digital in creation, since the observations themselves would be relayed and "rounded" to fit with a vast computational system. The computer itself is a "Cloud" in the sense that every radiological node used houses a proportion of the emulation that can be analysed (Clusters of nodes can be commanded to pipeline the data into an output at a centralised location). The emulation can have active doppler feedback used to generate a metric volume of resonance that can interact with the intend recipient (while limiting external diffusion, so as to remain unobserved). Manipulation of the active doppler can be synthesised within a centralised laboratory, likely feed through a Virtual Reality suite. This allows for matriced operators to interact directly with an individual at distance. Shared matrices aren't necessarily limited to just "Motion capture" but can actually allow for overlapping of brain patterns, which in turn can create shared visual experiences, tastes, smells, sounds and physical sensations.

The initial operation of such system initially would be likely to do with Espionage or Counter-Espionage industries, however there are better applications in Mental Health Treatment (Observing from a patients perspective, as opposed to just being a old school Psychiatrist locked into textbook definitions.), Trauma Therapy (Neurology/Nerve system's especially), there is also potential application commercially if the overall system is operated "Transparently" and "Safely". If proven safe, the future could be that people won't require technological devices like PDA's and Smartphones, but will actually have it piped in as terminal to a "cloud" service.

Obviously I've left out lots of important information like the mathematics, frequencies used and the governments, research bodies and other assorted institutes with vested interests. Let's just say I know it's not about "If" but more of a "When, Where and Why" and whether we will have it as a consumer or if it will be maintained to be "too dangerous".

When your answer to "if" is actually just a series of speculations about "how", you haven't actually answered it at all.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that the assumptions you're making have a basis in fact? If there isn't (there isn't), how do you know these people are not just plagued by leprechauns?

There is enough evidence, unfortunately the internet is also filled full of people misquoting evidence too, so pointing to an accurate source online would be difficult, especially since the system I'm identifying is one that currently has people agree to keep certain information secret. Since I'm an outsider to their group however, such agreements were never made with me.

 

[Stryder]

If I were you, I'd start by trying to precisely define "radiological mind control". If it can be telepathy or aliens or government radio waves broadcast into your mind etc. then it's a fairly non-specific catch-all term that will be incredibly hard to investigate. You need to break it down into pieces. Is telepathy possible? Do aliens exist and can they control minds (and if so, how)? Can minds be controlled with radio waves? etc.

That's the current problem, I know there is are specific bodies conducting such research or training through such system, however due to their secrecy they don't divulge the information to the "Victims", so the "victims" end up trying to rationalise what it is actually effecting them.

This means that if someone thinks God talks to them, or an Alien is controlling them or an evil government G-man is out to get them, they are all using their own rationale from their own psychological disposition to attempt to fill in the blanks. In essence they are all one in the same, but none of the above at the same time.

You're jumping to premature conclusions again, since you have no systematic evidence that ANY of the "claimed reasons" are plausible. Nor have you given us any reason to believe your claims that psychiatrists are out of touch.

No conclusions that people jump to are assuming I haven't seen evidence myself. Can I share the evidence, well no, not currently. Unfortunately to be able to do that is going to require a number of drastic changes in regards to regulation.

As for evidence as to psychiatrist being out of touch, well the simplest reasoning is down to the difference made by being able to observe someone internally. Standard psychiatrists will be only able to access "peer-reviewed journals", if they are of course interested in current changes in their profession, however the base of their profession still utilises chemistry to attempt to deal with the various ailments that patients have. The usage of such systems potentially allows an observation of a patient, in essence they wouldn't want to tell the patient initially because it's obviously an invasion of privacy, however they can learn what the problem is, observe where it is (through MRI) and rather than giving a generic drug that has side effects, they *might* be able to reshape a person brain functions to adjust how they are. For instance if a person is violent, doctors wont want to be in the same room, but if they could put the brain pattern of a pacifist or meditating monk into a person it *might* calm them. I say *might* because after all it will work far more effectively if people "embrace it" rather than forcing it on someone and have them resistant every step of the way.

But you're asking people to jump to conclusions before they even know what you're talking about. You have to establish the phenomenon first.

Those that are victims know they are, however they aren't sure what they are a victim of. The problem is however that when they attempt to explain they are a victim they end up with people implying that what they are a victim of "can't exist" or "Doesn't exist" which itself just furthers the victimisation.

In essence without people willing to identify and embrace the existence (if only to allow them the same fundamental rights that everyone is suppose to be assured, If a gay guy can be gay and a muslim shouldn't be treated a terrorist, such victims should be seen as victims rather than just being laughed and jeered at as that is what makes them one thousand times worse.)

It wouldn't matter if there was evidence or not, if people were of course looking out for such rights.

 

[James R]

Stryder:

To have a victim, you need a perpetrator and a method of victimisation. In the case of "radiological mind control" you appear to have established neither.

 

[Stryder]

James:
Here's another way of looking at it, prove to me that a Mobile phone exists. Now you could likely throw a handset at me and say "There, it exists!", however you are using someone else's build, their parenthesis, their design to prove it, I could be close minded and imply that without you actually building one yourself from scratch and documenting it, that no evidence you submit will support it actually exists.

This is not dissimilar to the query of "victimisation" and how to prove if it exists. You ask for evidence but any testimony or pointing to information currently kept secret due to such things as "The Data Protection Act" is currently implying that "No evidence is good enough".

So we end up with an impasse which seems (too?) heavily reliant upon scrutinising evidence, but the real question I would have for you is, "If you were given evidence in all it's refinement, what exactly would you do with it?" considering that you aren't effected by this or believe this is a problem, it would suggest you're nothing more than a casual observer, a proverbial "Tyre kicker". (Please don't take that as an attempted ad hominen, it's an observation of how some casual observers butt in, but have little to offer in the way of discussion or enlightenment.)

 

[origin]

James:
Here's another way of looking at it, prove to me that a Mobile phone exists. Now you could likely throw a handset at me and say "There, it exists!", however you are using someone else's build, their parenthesis, their design to prove it, I could be close minded and imply that without you actually building one yourself from scratch and documenting it, that no evidence you submit will support it actually exists.

I refuse to believe that you actually think that this is logical. So since I did not build my computer, it does not exist? That is not even in the realm of rational thought.:shrug:

 

[Read-Only]

I refuse to believe that you actually think that this is logical. So since I did not build my computer, it does not exist? That is not even in the realm of rational thought.:shrug:

This is a pointless thread *except* for the fact that it has raised serious doubts about Stryder's state of mental well-being. He clearly stated that he believes (actually, KNOWS) that such technology exists!

Not only that, in stating that mental health professionals are worthless leads me to another conclusion: He's been to one or more and they didn't help because they wouldn't accept his paranoid belief.

So, in fact, what this thread is REALLY about is an attempt on his part to connect with others that share his same paranoid delusion.

As you have just pointed out, his thinking is not at all rational.