Thursday, August 11, 2011

Instrument Credibility

[Post editing in process. Thank you for your patience.]

"What I am advocating certainly describes a demonstrable pattern in the mass deception we have observed. Conflation is easy to achieve when the audience is in a heightened emotional state such as anger or fear."

"Contrast the effects of the just described deception pattern with the machine detectable authenticity study's results. "

Even without seeing their faces or the presentations in their midst, one got the sense of a major bridge emerging.

A frequency distribution of identity context correlations ranging from maximally deceptive to maximally authentic.

Empirical protocol.
Deception Stream, Authentic Stream.
Predicted vs. Actual Authenticity

What patterns emerged from comparing the deception stream from the authentic stream? What impact did opinions about the streams have?

NOTE: Some of the foregoing in this BuzzTheHill post is not fictional. Consider it a public disclosure and as such, to the degree something novel and not obvious to those skilled in the art has been addressed, the specific intent was/is to put it in the PUBLIC DOMAIN

© 2011 Buzz Hill


  1. In the universal "set of all conspiracies", the details of all of them differ. Who's being fooled and who's doing the fooling; the secret (malevolent) objective and the obfuscatory ("we're the smart people") narrative.
    The saving grace in all this is that when I know the structure of these things, I can choose a powerful response that does not rely on my understanding of, or even the truth value of any of these stories that I hear.
    Jesus fights Satan not by raising a fist or dueling with words or by cleverly discerning his secret intentions.
    Jesus said, "Get thee behind me!". The magic formula is "leading with love".

  2. Thank you, Anonymous. As we know other great leaders have communicated the same wisdom even before the prince of peace was born. Sharing as we do with the new tools is starting to make a timely difference.