A few months ago, I started searching for information about the Bilderberg group. It is alleged that they essentially pick presidents, and a lot of other crazy Illuminati new world order conspiracy bullshit.
And then I kept looking for more credible, factual information. There essentially is none.
A logical conclusion would be that a bunch of crazy people are just saying crazy things. But… people don’t just start talking about something for NO reason. Something must have triggered it. Let me put it this way, the Bilderberg Group does exist, right? What is its purpose then?
It’s just kind of… funny that no real media attention would be given to this meeting. Maybe it even makes some of you realize how corrupt global media is? The fact that mainstream media doesn’t pick up on this story is quite puzzling.
But what if every major media company is “indirectly” owned by the Rothschilds? Then it all starts to make sense. Okay, maybe it’s not literally the Rothschilds that own every media company, but maybe there are 6 really rich people who do…
(Another quick anecdote: Dr. Steven Greer shared information with a mainstream news reporter about similar secret activities. The reporter got super excited, as she thought this would be huge to break to the public. Dr. Greer told her that her boss wouldn’t let her do the story. She thought she was hot shit and could say whatever she wanted to the world. She was wrong… I’m not saying that aliens have visited Earth, but Dr. Greer has gotten dozens of ex military and government personnel to say that they would testify under Congress that they saw or knew about projects involved with aliens.)
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones made many in the public more aware of this group’s existence. To oversimplify things, Alex Jones was called a conspiracy theorist for assuming that meetings like Bilderberg existed. Yet, he was… right?
I hereby acknowledge that none of the above text represents my opinion, as I have not yet made a full opinion on this topic. I am simply looking for the truth about how this world works, and attempt to model the truth with a superposition of beliefs of myself and others.
Today’s world is dominated by data. There is labeled data, or “data that is known to be true”. And there is unlabeled data, or “data that we are unsure about the validity”. (That’s just how I define it for this discussion) In an era where we have nearly unlimited data (or at least that’s what our cell phone plans say), it seems obvious to always trust the labeled data. So why would I be interested in conspiracy theories, which inherently seems to have no labeled data?
A fundamental flaw that many humans make is to assume that unlabeled data is labeled data. I made this mistake when I was a naive undergraduate, because I believed everything that I was told from my “smart professors”. This isn’t a problem, unless the data is actually false. So we get by okay, as long as we work together to reject all of the bad unlabeled data. Perhaps the scientific method is an algorithm for acquiring labeled data.
I soon realized that many intellectuals trust this labeled data so much, that they hold it to their grave. They refuse to even listen to unlabeled data. It makes logical sense. Why would I even read unlabeled data if I could choose labeled data? Well, the point is that no labeled data is truly labeled data, we just assumed it was…
Once I realized this, I suddenly stopped caring about subjects that were abundant in labeled data. Solving problems with labeled data is not interesting. It is easy. You simply do the research and regurgitate all of the information. At no point do you need to do any critical thinking. It seems that the true process of learning is not collecting labeled data, but converting unlabeled data to labeled data.
When you look at it this way, fundamentally, the most difficult questions to answer are ones in which all of the known data is unlabeled. How can anyone make sense out of all of this junk? These smart people who have prided themselves on memorizing a collection of labeled data immediately fail at answering these questions… Think about it this way, anyone can write a computer code to take a shitload of labeled data and deduce something useful with it. What about a shitload of unlabeled data?
I think I have demonstrated that the following question may be one of the most difficult questions to answer with any confidence. Does difficult imply interesting? Well, maybe it’s important…
What do you think they talk about at Bilderberg Group?