Visualization

Visualization
By Gerard Holmgren




[[ I notice the person with an artistic mind can
operate on "suggestion"meaning they don't have to
have a solid line to see a curb, a street, an edge of
a book but can take a broken line with dots and
correctly make up for the breaks in the line--]]


I think everyone does that. The degree varies from person to person, but the basic process is the same. It is impossible for us to directly take in and process every single piece of data that presents itself to our senses - and usually not necessary. So we filter it by taking snapshots of what we think are the important parts, and then assume the rest to connect the dots.

If we didn't do this, we couldn't react to anything quickly enough to survive. So we extrapolate one piece of directly observed sensory data to a picture containing other data which we assume would be likely to be associated with it.

So if we hear unexpected noises in the house late at night and someone's voice, we assume that someone has broken in and form a picture in our mind of where in the house we believe the intruder to be. This imaginary picture is a deduction which helps us to anticipate the scene we are likely to confront when we go to that room.

Another of my friends (who supports the official story), but who I also believe is not lying, is adamant that he saw footage on the morning, of the tail of the wrecked plane protruding from the pentagon and lying across the pentagon lawn.

We were told what happened, and creating some kind of visualization of it is the only way we can make it real. After time, we become confused about what we actually observed and the visualizations we extrapolated from it in order to complete the picture.

Because this kind of extrapolation is a vital tool for any kind of day to day functionality, propagandists exploit it's workings in the selling of illusions.

With training, we can learn to have more control over switching this function off to some degree in situations where it has the capacity to deceive rather than inform.

For example, when the local paper showed 6 photos on the front page of Saddam's statue coming down, by that time I had trained myself to look at the backgrounds for signs of fakery and spotted them quickly, - something I wouldn't have done so easily a few years before.

One of them was so blatant that it was actually a different statue - so different that Saddam was in civvies not military garb.

But in testing this out on other people, I found they didn't spot it. I had to rub their noses in it before they saw it. Which means that they had not observed anywhere near all of the data - just like me when I looked at the plane video.

What they did was very quickly scan the six photos and notice that all contained crowds and a statue, and then assume - on the basis of general assumptions about the world - that all the photos showed the same scene and therefore the same statue. From that moment on their imagination of what the statues looked like took over and became a memory, which enabled them to filter out the direct observation of the statues - something which had now been determined to be unnecessary clogging up of the senses, since they already knew what the statues looked like, and free up their direct observation snapshots for other things.

Anyone actually looking at the statues at their primary source of data wouldn't have failed to miss the odd one out for even a nanosecond, but their sensory filtering system had already shut this out in order to prioritize other aspects of what they were looking at, since they had already made a decision at some level that they had seen 6 identical scenes and therefore statues.

And my senses really did the same thing, it's just that I then went through a fully conscious process of re-examining that extrapolation. Because it's not like the odd statue out was the very first thing I saw. I had to make myself see it.

I would bet that after 5 seconds of looking at the photos, my impressions and deductions would have been the same as those people who still weren't spotting it after 30 seconds of me asking them "tell me what's wrong with that photo".

In order to see it, I first had to make a conscious decision to look for anomalies, and after a few seconds I started finding them.

So although I spotted it in a few seconds, essentially I went through the same process as the others - an instant decision that I was looking at 6 identical scenes and statues - and then my training kicked in at the conscious level and corrected the illusion the for me- as it eventually did for the people I tested, it just took them a lot longer and they needed prompting to do it.

So I believe that we all create these false images - some of which develop into memories - all of the time, and that only the degree varies. That depends on the fact that some people are naturally more visually thorough than others. And also that one can then train oneself to challenge the process.

Some people may take in more through sound for example and then extrapolate the visual data from that - others may be quicker with vision and extrapolate sound from what they see. Everyone is a mixture, but the balance of which sense does more direct observation and which relies more on extrapolation varies from person to person.

So propaganda depends on making a suggestion, planting minimal but crucial data to suggest it and then letting the victim make up their own extrapolations to complete it - which is far more effective than directly forcing every detail in to them.

Ironically, this may be one of the reasons why the hijacker story with the box cutters never worked very well on me, because the very first time I heard a newsbunny report this, I misheard "cardboard cutters" for "cardboard cut-outs" and so immediately started to try to form a visualization of the hijackers advancing down the aisles holding cardboard cut-outs of some kind.

As I wrestled with the impossible task of trying to put some kind of sensible visualization to what I thought I had heard, trying to imagine exactly what kind of cardboard cut-outs they might be holding, the image popped into my mind of them holding cardboard cut - outs of themselves, which of course led to more internal wrestling to try to visualize how this made them dangerous and how it helped them to take over the plane.

I'm probably fortunate for this mis-hearing because it meant that the hijacker with box cutters image never got off to a good start with me and thus made it much easier to bust the story in my own mind later.

There's a funny story from my family in relation to this, when my brother was about 4. My father had lost his car keys and in desperation at having looked everywhere, had taken to combing the front lawn for them, eagerly helped by my brother.

As he explained later, it was difficult for him because at that age, he wasn't really sure what car keys actually looked like and he was searching for some kind of visualization in his mind to know exactly what they were looking for.

Then it was presented. My Father, in exasperation exclaimed "Oh , this is a wild goose chase ! " and as my brother explained, suddenly this helped him to make the breakthrough. He was now able to see what the car keys looked like, because he suddenly got a picture in his mind of a wild goose flying off with the car keys in it's beak.

But it was only in association with the goose that he could finally visualize what car keys looked like, and so of course the entire picture became real for him and he excitedly said "That's it Dad ! A wild goose came up and took them. I saw him Dad ! I saw him ! "

And he actually did think that he had seen it, because what had previously been some shadowy semi-mythical object (the car keys) had suddenly assumed visual reality in association with the wild goose that took them.

I believe that as adults we are still creating these imaginary visualizations for any situation which is somewhat unfamiliar and needs pictures in the mind to make it real. They just don't seem as absurd as the above example because as we grow older there are less unfamiliar situations in need of quick visualization, and thus less obvious errors are made.

But the hilarious situation of me desperately trying to make some sense out of the image of Arab hijackers advancing down the aisle, menacingly holding cardboard cut-outs of themselves, because that's whatI thought a newsbunny had told me to imagine, shows that should we be confronted with the truly unfamiliar, then the goose with the car keys is still the way we do things.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles posted on this website are distributed for their included information without profit for research and/or educational purposes only. This website has no affiliation whatsoever with the original sources of the articles nor are we sponsored or endorsed by any of the original sources.