Observations and Assumptions

We make sense of the world through a combination of observation and deduction. Deduction leads to assumptions about what we would be likely to observe if we took in more data.

We build the big picture by observing relatively small amounts of data and then layering multiple consequent assumptions. The brain will often trick itself into thinking that some of these assumptions were actually real observations, and then will hold on to these “observations”.

The purpose of this is to compress large amounts of observed data into more general observations, in order to make room for more data. So we create "false observations" in our minds. They are actually generalised assumptions about what we've observed, but they usurp the original observations and can alter them very strongly.

An essential tool for brainwashing and disinformation (like an intelligence virus or malware script) is to plant specific observable data which will trigger false assumptions that will over time solidify into false observations. (The courts have tried to develop certain safeguards against this misleading memory effect, such as the rule against admitting hearsay into evidence.)

Case study:

Observed data: 1) The Govt says a large plane hit the Pentagon (essentially, hearsay, with the same government hiding at least three videos from security cameras that would very likely show the flying object with enough picture resolution to identify it).

2) The media selectively reports things like "witnesses said the aircraft exploded on impact as it tore a huge hole in the building." (Initial media reports were that there were no large debris of a plane. Further, there are many details of key forensic relevance which are never reported.)

3) The media gives witness reports bristling with emotional markers like "I couldn't believe it. There was a massive explosion and huge amounts of smoke started pouring from the building." (This is moreover merely incidental since it does not mention any plane, not to mention a precise description of a plane.)

A heavily edited assumption comes together: The witness, who is so shocked that he or she can hardly speak, saw a plane fly into the building.

Let’s say there is an average of 5 of these poison pills in each mainstream media report, and the average person ingests 5 such reports a day over a 7 day period. Thus they have observed 175 such reports in the first week after the event - even though many of these will be repeats of the same reports. Negative side effects are only natural from such a shock and awe treatment.

End of the data planting process. The amount of data is now overwhelming (but not one piece of it is truly direct and authentic – all filtered through tricky spin, bias and emotion filters). The assumption process sets in in a panic rush mode while the drums are beating in order to compress and make some sense of the filtered data. It is whipped up feverish and frenzied.


Assumption: Hundreds of people saw the plane fly into the building. The whole thing is perceived through painful and very real trauma which deactivates our safeguards against deception. Over days, this traumatic assumption then disguises itself as a direct observation.

The hapless victim of this process now forgets the scant data he or she did observe and replaces them with a more generic piece of interpolations - which were actually a pre-edited assumption, not an observation, but they've forgotten that.

So now one false observation fills their minds of something that never happened, while something else did happen to which nobody is paying attention because it was not “observed”.