Information exists inside a market. ‘Extraordinary claim’ and ‘simplest explanation’ are two common buzz-phrases of that market’s huckster, hustler and shyster.
I always thought the '...extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence..' Statement as the intellectual equivalent of saying ,'...um...' , that is, a harmless pause that had no real meaning.
I see your point, why say it at all if not to shutdown a path of inquiry.
I think Occam's razor, serves well to identify the first place to look, as long as it understood that the simplest explanation is not always the correct one.
Any math parts are always a heavy lift for me, but the explanations catch enough of the spirit to feel pretty solid when it gets to lists of familiar items.. big time kudos & thanks for that! Maybe more wonderful are the adventures.. flippin adore fun first hand accounts! :~)
While l agree with what you say about extraordinary claims, I think "the simplest explanation" which is not Sagan's original apothegm but Occam's Razor is very valid and I always apply Occam's Razor as I go along - the thing with Occam's Razor is you might need to keep changing your conclusion as you get more evidence ... and people often don't do that. Assuming you have sufficient evidence I believe Occam's Razor always applies, it's only when you don't have sufficient evidence that it may fail. It's the simplest explanation to fit the evidence - not the narrative but the evidence.
We might say the claim that 9/11 wasn't the work of 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters is extraordinary ... but then isn't the claim that it was the extraordinary one really? How were 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters responsible for catastrophic failure of a multi-trillion dollar military and intelligence infrastructure four times in one morning including penetration of Defence HQ? Seriously?
Where is the extraordinary explanation that explains this extraordinary phenomenon?
When the Big Lie aka psyop isn't in your paradigm of how the world works arguing against the 19-terrorists claim might seem extraordinary but when the Big Lie is in your paradigm then the signs of a psyop are immediately evident. If psyops had been in my paradigm of how the world works when 9/11 happened I would have worked out in about five minutes flat that it was a psyop.
First thing I would have done was look at the images presented to us for the alleged 6,000 injured and right there I would have recognised they were all "drill" injured and that none of the images showed people injured and maimed in the ways expected from the destructions of two 110-storey towers. So right there I would have known 9/11 was a demolition job in the guise of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terror Exercise pushed out as a real terror attack. Of course, if any evidence came along to contradict that hypothesis I would have needed to change my conclusion ... but none has. Analyses have been done of the alleged victims and shown that many were simply completely made up ... and on and on.
By the time covid came around I was well up on psyops and knew from Day One that it was a psyop because they showed us images against reality of people falling flat on their faces and told us nonsense (debunking the nonsense within the same article) about two species of snake, the Chinese cobra and the many-banded krait being "reservoirs" of the "novel" virus. Being a psyop I knew there would be no novel virus because psyops are all about mind control, not doing things for real unless wanted and they didn't want a virus, they only wanted us to believe in one.
Psyops: Nobody dies nobody gets hurt ... unless wanted - It's all about mind control
I always thought the '...extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence..' Statement as the intellectual equivalent of saying ,'...um...' , that is, a harmless pause that had no real meaning.
I see your point, why say it at all if not to shutdown a path of inquiry.
I think Occam's razor, serves well to identify the first place to look, as long as it understood that the simplest explanation is not always the correct one.
Great post
There are a number of extraordinary claims in this otherwise excellent article!
Perhaps the most odd: It appears from the questions that you still believe there was a ‘Covid19’ ? Something to ‘treat early’?
I am fairly surprised that you of all people still believe in this long planned, rehearsed and table-topped hoax.
On a deeper level, it is fast being understood that infectious pathogens are total fantasy.
The excellent new book ‘Can you catch a cold’ joins the growing list of brilliant presentations of the evidence on this core issue.
Germ Theory is without a shred of backing in the real world at any point.
Given the massive risk and damage from a million ‘treatments’ this is a key claim of ‘medical authority’ that requires extraordinary evidence.
Or ANY evidence!
Thank you. Loved this piece very much!
Any math parts are always a heavy lift for me, but the explanations catch enough of the spirit to feel pretty solid when it gets to lists of familiar items.. big time kudos & thanks for that! Maybe more wonderful are the adventures.. flippin adore fun first hand accounts! :~)
While l agree with what you say about extraordinary claims, I think "the simplest explanation" which is not Sagan's original apothegm but Occam's Razor is very valid and I always apply Occam's Razor as I go along - the thing with Occam's Razor is you might need to keep changing your conclusion as you get more evidence ... and people often don't do that. Assuming you have sufficient evidence I believe Occam's Razor always applies, it's only when you don't have sufficient evidence that it may fail. It's the simplest explanation to fit the evidence - not the narrative but the evidence.
We might say the claim that 9/11 wasn't the work of 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters is extraordinary ... but then isn't the claim that it was the extraordinary one really? How were 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters responsible for catastrophic failure of a multi-trillion dollar military and intelligence infrastructure four times in one morning including penetration of Defence HQ? Seriously?
Where is the extraordinary explanation that explains this extraordinary phenomenon?
When the Big Lie aka psyop isn't in your paradigm of how the world works arguing against the 19-terrorists claim might seem extraordinary but when the Big Lie is in your paradigm then the signs of a psyop are immediately evident. If psyops had been in my paradigm of how the world works when 9/11 happened I would have worked out in about five minutes flat that it was a psyop.
First thing I would have done was look at the images presented to us for the alleged 6,000 injured and right there I would have recognised they were all "drill" injured and that none of the images showed people injured and maimed in the ways expected from the destructions of two 110-storey towers. So right there I would have known 9/11 was a demolition job in the guise of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terror Exercise pushed out as a real terror attack. Of course, if any evidence came along to contradict that hypothesis I would have needed to change my conclusion ... but none has. Analyses have been done of the alleged victims and shown that many were simply completely made up ... and on and on.
By the time covid came around I was well up on psyops and knew from Day One that it was a psyop because they showed us images against reality of people falling flat on their faces and told us nonsense (debunking the nonsense within the same article) about two species of snake, the Chinese cobra and the many-banded krait being "reservoirs" of the "novel" virus. Being a psyop I knew there would be no novel virus because psyops are all about mind control, not doing things for real unless wanted and they didn't want a virus, they only wanted us to believe in one.
Psyops: Nobody dies nobody gets hurt ... unless wanted - It's all about mind control
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/psyops-nobody-dies-nobody-gets-hurt