Channel: A.S.
频道: A.S。
My dear Earth friends,
我亲爱的地球朋友们,
Many of you will already know what I’m going to share today. But I think the following is important enough that I want to dedicate a message to it anyway:
你们中的很多人已经知道我今天要分享什么了。但我认为以下内容足够重要，无论如何，我想为它献上一段话:
By itself, it seems somewhat harmless that it’s constantly stressed that people should listen to experts, and that the opinion of experts is elevated over things like gut feeling and intuition and what the average person on the street commonly thinks and what reality seems to be if people simply look at the world around them. By itself, it seems somewhat harmless that expert opinion is elevated over those things.
就其本身而言，不断强调人们应该听从专家的意见，专家的意见高于直觉和直觉，以及普通人的普遍想法，如果人们只是看看他们周围的世界，现实似乎是什么，这些似乎都是无害的。就其本身而言，专家意见高于这些事情似乎是无害的。
By itself, it seems somewhat harmless that things on the internet get censored if they contradict the opinion of experts.
就其本身而言，如果互联网上的东西与专家的意见相抵触，就会受到审查，这似乎在某种程度上是无害的。
By itself, it seems somewhat harmless that mainstream media and social media platforms can decide which experts get promoted and spotlighted, and which experts get deplatformed.
就其本身而言，主流媒体和社交媒体平台可以决定哪些专家得到提拔和关注，哪些专家得到贬低，这似乎是无害的。
However, if you put these three seemingly-innocuous things together, then effectively you’ve given legacy media and social media platforms the ability to fabricate reality.
然而，如果你把这三个看似无害的东西放在一起，那么实际上你已经给了传统媒体和社交媒体平台编造现实的能力。
How so? Well, let’s look at an example.
为什么? 举个例子。
At some point legacy media and social media decided they wished to push the narrative that covid was real and incredibly deadly and that a huge amount of people would die from it and there was nothing sneaky going on. The message was just: a black plague-like pandemic has arrived, and that’s it, governments have no agenda here other than saving lives.
在某个时候，传统媒体和社交媒体决定，他们希望推动这样的叙述: 冠状病毒疾病是真实的，致命的，会有大量人死于它，没有什么鬼鬼祟祟的事情发生。这个信息只是: 一场黑色瘟疫般的大流行已经到来，仅此而已，各国政府在这里除了拯救生命之外没有其他任何议程。
So it was endlessly stressed that people should listen to experts. The media cherry-picked and promoted those experts who pushed the desired message. The media deplatformed genuine experts and scientists and doctors who contradicted the desired message.
因此，人们无休止地强调应该听从专家的意见。媒体精心挑选和宣传那些推动所希望的信息的专家。媒体诋毁那些与所期望的信息相矛盾的真正的专家、科学家和医生。
The media thereby created an illusion that like 99.99% of experts agreed with the narrative, when in reality that percentage was substantially lower. That percentage would have been even lower, had experts not been threatened with the loss of their job or funding if they contradicted the official narrative.
因此，媒体制造了一种假象，即99.99% 的专家同意这种说法，而实际上这一比例要低得多。如果专家没有受到威胁，如果他们与官方说法相矛盾，就会失去工作或资金，那么这一比例会更低。
And of course, if 99.99% of experts agree on something (they didn’t), then it’s fair to censor misinformation, right? But it was never the case that 99.99% of experts agreed.
当然，如果99.99% 的专家同意某件事(他们没有) ，那么审查错误信息是公平的，对吗？但99.99% 的专家并不同意这种说法。
Keep in mind that just because the media pretends that practically every expert agrees on something, doesn’t mean that’s actually so. They’re simply lying. They pretend that there’s an expert consensus when in reality that doesn’t exist, and then they fabricate the perception of that consensus by selectively deplatforming and censoring experts who go against the desired narrative.
请记住，仅仅因为媒体假装几乎每个专家都同意某件事，并不意味着事实就是如此。他们只是在撒谎。他们假装有一个专家共识，但实际上并不存在，然后他们通过有选择性地贬低和审查那些违背所期望的叙述的专家，来编造这种共识的感觉。
This is a critical point. Always remember that when the media implies or states that there’s some expert consensus here, almost never are they actually proving that this alleged consensus exists. Sure, sometimes this consensus really does exist, but sometimes it doesn’t and they’re just fabricating it out of thin air. And then they’re reinforcing their fabrication via the deplatforming of experts who disagree with them.
这是一个关键点。永远记住，当媒体暗示或声称这里存在某种专家共识时，他们几乎从未真正证明过这种所谓的共识的存在。当然，有时这种共识确实存在，但有时并不存在，他们只是凭空捏造出来的。然后，他们通过对持不同意见的专家进行去平台化来强化他们的虚构。
This is actually an incredibly powerful tool to fabricate reality. The masses think that the media is just some party passing along information, when in reality the media can very easily get most of the population to believe that reality is whatever they fabricate it to be.
这实际上是一个非常强大的工具来制造现实。大众认为媒体只是一个传递信息的政党，而事实上，媒体可以很容易地让大多数人相信，现实就是他们捏造出来的东西。
This is similar to how people think that polls are a way to measure public opinion, when in reality polls are often a way to fabricate public opinion. After all, you can make polls say whatever you wish, just by oversampling people who agree with your desired opinion. Or in plain English: if five people agree with you and five people disagree with you, and you take a poll among four people who agree and one person who disagrees with you, then the poll will say that 80% of people agree with you.
这类似于人们认为民意调查是衡量公众意见的一种方式，而实际上民意调查往往是捏造公众意见的一种方式。毕竟，你可以让民意调查说任何你想说的话，只是通过过度采样那些同意你想要的观点的人。或者简单地说: 如果五个人同意你的观点，五个人不同意你的观点，你在四个同意你的人和一个不同意你的人之间进行一次民意调查，那么民意调查将显示80% 的人同意你的观点。
If the average person believes that most people believe something, then they will believe it too. If the average person believes that most people favor X over Y, then probably this person will favor X too, even if it was never true that most people favored X. Therefore most people can be nudged to believe X, because they believe that most people believe X, when in reality they never did. But then the poll appears accurate afterwards, because the poll said that most people prefer X and indeed most people now prefer X. But most people only prefer X because the poll initially lied about most people preferring X. Therefore the poll didn’t measure reality, the poll fabricated reality.
如果一般人相信大多数人相信某件事，那么他们也会相信。如果普通人相信大多数人喜欢 X 胜过喜欢 Y，那么这个人可能也会喜欢 X，即使大多数人喜欢 X 从来都不是真的。因此，大多数人可以被推动去相信 X，因为他们相信大多数人相信 X，而实际上他们从来没有相信过。但是之后的民意调查显示更准确，因为民意调查显示大多数人更喜欢 X，事实上大多数人现在更喜欢 X。但是大多数人只喜欢 X，因为民意测验最初谎称大多数人喜欢 X。因此，民意测验没有衡量现实，民意测验编造了现实。
In fact, the poll fabricated reality so well that the poll made up that most people prefer X, and because of the power of the poll, most people now genuinely do prefer X. Because they think most others prefer X, when they never did before the poll fabricated that reality.
事实上，这个民意调查捏造的现实太好了，以至于大多数人都喜欢 X，而且因为这个民意调查的力量，大多数人现在真的更喜欢 X。因为他们认为大多数人更喜欢 X，而在这个民意调查捏造现实之前，他们从来没有这样想过。
In this way, one poll can change the opinion of millions of people, just by convincing the masses that a majority opinion among the people exists, when it doesn’t.
通过这种方式，一次民意调查就可以改变数百万人的观点，只要说服大众相信人民中存在多数意见，而事实并非如此。
Is your head spinning? Yes, from the perspective of the dark controllers, reality really is this malleable. The herd of sheep really are this easy to herd into a slaughterhouse.
你头晕吗？是的，从黑暗控制者的角度来看，现实是可塑的。羊群真的很容易被赶进屠宰场。
Suppose the dark controllers wish to sabotage a political candidate in the minds of the public, or wish to convince a political candidate that they can’t win and should drop out of the race. Then the dark controllers can use skewed polls that oversample people who disagree with those candidates. This sounds silly, but it’s actually effective, because the public doesn’t want to promote or talk about or volunteer for or donate to candidates if the polls show they have no chance. It’s also much harder for a political campaign to secure funding if they poll poorly. This is why there’s sometimes talk that a certain political candidate may be beloved, but they’re simply not viable. In part they’re not viable because they’re being sabotaged by skewed polls from the dark controllers. Funnily enough, the candidates that the dark controllers like are always viable and are usually polling well, even when most people despise those candidates
假设黑暗控制者希望在公众心目中破坏一个政治候选人，或者希望说服一个政治候选人他们不能赢，应该退出竞选。然后，黑暗控制者可以使用扭曲的民意测验来过度抽样那些不同意这些候选人的人。这听起来很傻，但实际上是有效的，因为如果民意调查显示他们没有机会，公众不想提升、谈论、志愿或捐赠给候选人。如果民调结果不佳，政治竞选也更难获得资金。这就是为什么有时会有人说某个政治候选人可能受人喜爱，但他们根本不可行。部分原因是他们被黑暗控制者扭曲的民意调查所破坏。有趣的是，黑暗控制者喜欢的候选人总是可行的，而且通常在民意调查中表现良好，即使大多数人鄙视这些候选人
The dark controllers also tried this during the 2016 Trump vs Hillary election. Polls usually predicted that Hillary would win, but then Trump won. So the polls weren’t accurate, as is often the case, however in this case they failed to manufacture the reality they were allegedly predicting, and so the polls were exposed in this instance. However most people failed to realize the significance of this exposure, and so today most people still believe polls. This is a shame: in an ideal world people would have stopped believing in polls after 2016, or even earlier.
在2016年特朗普对阵希拉里的选举中，黑暗控制者也尝试过这种做法。民调通常预测希拉里会赢，但特朗普赢了。因此，民意调查并不准确，这种情况经常发生，但是在这种情况下，他们没有捏造出他们所谓的预测的现实，所以民意调查在这种情况下暴露了。然而大多数人没有意识到这次曝光的重要性，所以今天大多数人仍然相信民意调查。这是一种耻辱: 在一个理想的世界里，人们会在2016年之后，甚至更早的时候就不再相信民意调查了。
Intentionally skewed polls are also a great method to cover up election manipulation. If election results are in line with poll results, then the election doesn’t look manipulated, however often in the west it’s the case that the elections and the polls were simply both manipulated.
有意倾斜的民意调查也是掩盖选举操纵的一个很好的方法。如果选举结果与民意调查结果一致，那么选举看起来就不像是被操纵的，然而在西方，选举和民意调查往往都是被操纵的。
Polls aren’t tools to measure public opinion. They’re tools to fabricate public opinion.
民意调查不是衡量民意的工具，而是捏造民意的工具。
At least, they are whenever the dark controllers wish to push a certain narrative. Of course there are people out there who genuinely do good polling, with a reasonable sampling. Some polls are reasonably accurate.
至少，只要黑暗控制者希望推动某种叙事，他们就会这样做。当然，有些人真的做了很好的民意调查，而且是合理的抽样调查。有些民意调查相当准确。
So the media and polls can fabricate whatever reality they want, and most of the public will believe that this fabricated reality is actual reality.
因此，媒体和民意调查可以捏造任何他们想要的现实，而且大多数公众会相信这个捏造的现实就是现实。
This is Orwellian.
这是奥威尔式的。
Unfortunately, this pattern of fabricating false realities has been repeating over and over and over again. For example, the media fabricated a false reality that inflation would be transitory. The media fabricated a false reality that Russia would lose the Ukraine war. The media fabricated a false reality that invading Iraq was an appropriate response to 9/11. Et cetera, et cetera.
不幸的是，这种编造虚假现实的模式一直在一遍又一遍地重复。例如，媒体捏造了一个虚假的现实，即通胀将是短暂的。媒体捏造了俄罗斯将输掉乌克兰战争的虚假事实。媒体捏造了一个错误的事实，即入侵伊拉克是对9/11的适当反应。等等，等等。
How often does the media need to fabricate a false reality before the masses stop listening to them?
媒体需要多久捏造一个虚假的现实，然后群众才会停止听取他们的意见？
I guess people are exhausted and overburdened and scared, and just believing what the brainwashing box says is easier than thinking for themself. Plus there are social consequences to thinking for yourself.
我猜人们已经筋疲力尽，负担过重，感到害怕，相信洗脑盒子说的话比自己思考要容易。另外，独立思考也会带来社会后果。
The question: “Who do you believe, me or your own lying eyes?” used to be a joke, but nowadays many people often genuinely believe the media over their own eyes.
问题是: “你相信谁，我还是你自己撒谎的眼睛?”曾经是一个笑话，但是现在很多人经常真诚地相信媒体而不是他们自己的眼睛。
This isn’t a coincidence either. A few years ago, a US senator showed a snowball as part of him making an argument against the climate change narrative.
这也不是巧合。几年前，一位美国参议员展示了一个雪球，作为他反对气候变化说法的一部分。
From the point of view of the dark controllers, who also control mainstream media and many social media platforms, this is completely unacceptable. It is unacceptable for people to use their own eyes and brains to arrive at a conclusion, because if people do, reality can no longer be fabricated via cherry-picked experts. People who use their own eyes and brains must be relentlessly mocked or deplatformed. People must be bullied into not observing and not thinking and not doing anything, except listening to and referring to cherry-picked experts.
从控制着主流媒体和许多社交媒体平台的黑暗控制者的角度来看，这是完全不可接受的。人们用自己的眼睛和大脑来得出结论是不可接受的，因为如果人们这样做了，现实就不能再由精心挑选的专家来编造了。使用自己的眼睛和大脑的人必须被无情地嘲笑或贬低。人们必须被迫不去观察、不去思考、不去做任何事情，除了倾听和参考那些精心挑选的专家。
The insidious thing here is, of course, that in some cases people genuinely will arrive at incorrect conclusions if they just look at the world around them and think for themselves. And the dark controllers leverage this to enforce: don’t observe, don’t think, only listen to and refer to experts. However, the actual solution to the problem of people occasionally arriving at wrong conclusions if they observe and think for themselves, isn’t people shutting off their own critical thinking skills and just listening to experts. The solution is the free and uncensored marketplace of ideas.
当然，这里隐藏的东西是，在某些情况下，如果人们只是看看周围的世界，为自己考虑，他们真的会得出错误的结论。黑暗控制者利用这一点来强制执行: 不要观察，不要思考，只听专家的意见和建议。然而，如果人们自己观察和思考，偶尔得出错误结论的问题的实际解决方案，不是人们关闭自己的批判性思维技能，只听专家的意见。解决方案是自由和不受审查的思想市场。
This was also the point behind the recent exchange: “can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?” “I can’t. I’m not a biologist.” The person refusing to define the word “woman” is acting how the dark controllers want everyone to act: she is refusing to use her own eyes and brain, and in this exchange is doing nothing except listening to and referring to cherry-picked experts. This is what the dark controllers want people to do: don’t observe, don’t think, only listen to and refer to experts.
这也是最近交流背后的观点: “你能给‘女人’这个词下个定义吗?””我不能。我不是生物学家”那个拒绝定义“女人”这个词的人正在表现出黑暗控制者希望每个人都表现出来的样子: 她拒绝使用自己的眼睛和大脑，在这种交流中，她除了倾听和引用精心挑选的专家之外什么也不做。这就是黑暗控制者希望人们做的: 不要观察，不要思考，只听专家的意见和建议。
Cherry-picked experts are then spotlighted, and inconvenient experts are deplatformed and censored, and thus reality is fabricated. In this way, reality can be whatever the dark controllers want it to be.
然后，精心挑选的专家受到关注，不方便的专家受到歪曲和审查，因此，现实是捏造的。通过这种方式，现实可以成为黑暗控制者想要的任何东西。
Again, this is Orwellian.
再说一遍，这是奥威尔主义。
So: media can fabricate reality if we combine three things:
所以，媒体可以捏造现实，如果我们结合三件事:
– that people should listen to and refer to the experts
人们应该听取和咨询专家
– that media decides which experts get spotlighted and which get deplatformed, and thereby media can fabricate the illusion that an expert consensus exists
媒体决定哪些专家受到关注，哪些专家受到诋毁，因此媒体可以捏造专家共识存在的假象
– media can censor and deplatform average people if they contradict this alleged expert consensus (which in reality may not exist).
媒体可以审查和平台普通人，如果他们违背所谓的专家共识(在现实中可能不存在)。
Therefore the value of freedom of expression must be preserved.
因此，言论自由的价值必须得到保护。
In previous messages Hakann and Tunia have repeatedly spoken out against censorship and deplatforming. I completely agree: so long as people aren’t literally trying to organize a lynching or something egregious like that, speech should not be censored. This is critical. If censorship is allowed, then the media will just fabricate reality as they see fit, and an unelected undemocratic body should not have that ability.
在此前的信息中，哈坎和杜尼亚曾多次公开反对审查制度和压制民意。我完全同意: 只要人们没有真正地试图组织私刑或类似的恶劣行为，言论就不应该受到审查。这很关键。如果审查制度被允许，那么媒体只会按照他们认为合适的方式编造事实，一个非民主选举的非民主机构不应该有这种能力。
If you don’t want beings like the old me to be able to subvert a civilization, then freedom of expression must be preserved. Trust me, I should know.
如果你不希望像过去的我这样的人能够颠覆一个文明，那么言论自由必须得到保护。相信我，我应该知道的。
Finally, I would argue that people on Earth should also stop seeing expert opinion as the only thing that matters, and see it as just one very important piece of information. It’s too simple to say “don’t listen to experts” because sometimes they are genuinely right. However, I think that for example expert opinion and what the average person thinks should both be taken into account, not necessarily in the same amount, however expert opinion shouldn’t be the only thing that matters. It’s more democratic to also have the opinion of the average person on the street count to some extent.
最后，我要说的是，地球上的人们也应该停止把专家意见看作是唯一重要的事情，而应该把它看作是非常重要的信息之一。说“不要听专家的”太简单了，因为有时他们真的是对的。然而，我认为，例如专家意见和一般人的想法都应该考虑，不一定在同一数额，但专家意见不应该是唯一的事情。在一定程度上拥有普通民众的意见更民主。
As you know on Earth, there often is wisdom in crowds. In some cases, the average opinion of the masses is closer to the truth than expert opinion. Not always, and I’m not saying that experts shouldn’t be listened to. I’m just saying that expert opinion should be one thing that’s taken into account and it shouldn’t be the only thing that’s taken into account.
众所周知，人群中往往蕴藏着智慧。在某些情况下，群众的一般意见比专家意见更接近事实。并非总是如此，我并不是说不应该听取专家的意见。我只是说专家意见应该被考虑在内而不应该是唯一被考虑的事情。
I hope this was useful.
希望这个有用。
To be honest, it is a bit horrifying to look at the subtle means of control that are used on Earth. It’s scary that many people think they are free, and yet they are trapped in a mental cage they are not even aware of.
老实说，看到地球上使用的微妙的控制手段是有点恐怖的。很多人认为他们是自由的，但是他们却被困在一个他们自己都没有意识到的精神牢笼里，这很可怕。
Fortunately, as Tunia has correctly stated: you will be free.
幸运的是，正如杜尼亚所正确指出的那样，你们将获得自由。
All my love,
R’Kok
我所有的爱，R’Kwok
For Era of Light
为了光明时代
**Source: not on youtube because my channel might get into trouble. The article is only here.
来源: 不在 youtube 上，因为我的频道可能会遇到麻烦。文章仅在这里。
**These channelings are exclusively submitted to Eraoflight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to the original post.
* * 这些频道只由通道提交给 Eraoflight.com。如果你想在其他地方分享它们，请包括一个链接回到原来的职位。
转自：https://eraoflight.com/2023/07/26/rkok-media-fabricate-reality-by-cherry-picking-experts/
