Delusional feedback loops & timing the Armageddon

A delusional feedback loop, is a situation in society whereby there are some people, such as our current media, who exaggerate or distort what they report. These claims then make their way into the general population, and eventually, as they are echoed and reformulated by others, they come back to those who made the claim who failing to recognise that they are the source, start seeing what they hear/read as confirmation of their original assertion.

So, for example, the claim “Putin has said he will pre-emptively strike the US”. That claim has been made by many media, although nothing of the sort has been said. But, when it is repeated often enough and loud enough, the media start to believe their own lie, because all their colleagues are repeating it as if it is true.

In a situation of mass hysteria, as at present, when the press are deliberately attacking Putin, and willing and able to not just repeat, but exaggerate any claim, soon, the clamour of lies is so great, that even the lying press start believing they are telling the truth … because “everyone is saying it”. This is the positive feedback which over time tends to push thing further and further from the truth.

Normally, in everyday discourse, if one person were to make an outrageous statement, there is usually someone who will tell them they are being stupid. Someone who will point out the facts do not fit what they are saying, etc. This is the negative feedback, that compares what is being said and applies a pressure for it to be closer to the truth. But, in public discourse at the moment, we have people who deliberately try to censor any such sceptic comments. As a result, we are increasingly seeing “delusional feedback”, whereby the press, politicians and public go totally nuts. And, as I have said, it looks like eventually that will lead to nuclear Armageddon. We just do not seem to have the mechanisms to stop that kind of delusion with the way the internet is controlled and manipulated by big tech and government. We’re heading toward stupidity, and like the covid lock up, there is very little anyone can do to stop it.

However, it will take time to develop … and if we survive, the world will still be habitable in places afterwards. And, it’s not like we’ve not managed to build civilisation out of nothing before. So, let’s park that.


What is bugging me, is a clip I saw yesterday of a person in Australia, saying that students think that science, is now only peer reviewed. They refuse to see the evidence of their own eyes, if it contradicts a supposedly “peer reviewed paper”. I’m not sure if they said it, but the fact is that no scientific revolution ever comes from peer reviewed science, because, by the very nature of being a revolution, it goes against what has previously been considered true. We see this is the climate delusion. It is now all but impossible to get evidence contrary to the delusional consensus heard. The evidence cannot be heard unless it fits their delusion. The same is true of a lot of physics (which has stagnated for the last 50 years). The same is apparently true of biology which is what the Australian was referring to.

So, does this means that innovation and new ideas will slowly grind to a halt, and that perhaps this is also in some way due to the internet? I have in the past mentioned the way that academic subjects have become one big international group, so that there is now one consensus, one power structure and so there is now only “one truth” allowed. Peer review is part of that power structure, whereby those given the right to review … or reject others … now act as the gatekeepers to advancement in these subjects. Toe the line, you get on. Make waves, and you don’t.

Are we heading toward a real “dark age”, whereby there is so much authoritarianism and conformity that innovative thought becomes impossible? Is this as good, indeed, better, than it will ever be …

The inability to accept criticism, is the root of both our slide toward Armageddon, plus the stagnation of innovation.

Timing Armageddon

Is it predictable? We have the conditions that seem to make it inevitable, particularly the censorship and repression of sceptics which is now endemic. We have the bat shit crazy press willing to lie their heads off. We have the nudge unit, likewise willing to lie and manipulate, pushing us ever closer to the delusional feedback that sends us into Armageddon. However, these changes take time. Probably years. The slipping of moral values permitting mass atrocities is a gradual process of change, created by a repetition of lies from the media and government.

We are already starting to see the slip in morality. First the way the anti-Russian Nazis in Ukraine have been supported. The obscene hatred of Russians for being Russian. Now, the legitimisation of nuclear war, with not the slightest rebuke when that evil Zelensky asked that Russia be pre-emptively nuked. Morals have already slipped, the bar is being lowered to make it easier and easier to push us over the edge, and there is very little push back from politicians or any journalists. The media mafia are more and more willing to censor and repress common sense. We are already in the process which leads to the mass use of Nuclear war.

The same is true of rigging elections … the press know the US election was rigged, but not a squeak from the “mainstream” journalists. As a result the world is getting corrupt politicians in power. And they have no concern about creating war, as it is often very profitable to them. Immorality and criminality in politics is not new, but the way the press not just condone, but actively encourage immorality and criminality does appear to be new. They have gone bonkers. Yes, the media is controlled by a few big people, but have these journalists not an ounce of integrity? How do they sleep with themselves?

But how does that affect the timing of the Armageddon? I would suggest it takes 2-3 years of this delusional feedback to change morals sufficiently to allow atrocities. Covid may have reduced that through a general reduction in concern for individuals or acceptance of different points of view. Also the insane covid and Net Zero policies are putting huge pressures on politicians across the globe. I think the minimum needed is a year from the start.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.