"Evidently"? That's actually funny since I've spelled out the contrary unequivocally many times on this forum. So it is personal from misdirected prejudice, as I thought, and explains the misreading and animosity.lux wrote:Evidently you regard the psychological "sciences" and "authorities" to be a trustworthy source of information while I regard them as being as bogus as NASA if not more so. Therefore I doubt we will agree on any related topics. These are my opinions.
So, I'll say again, establishment "authorities" in any "sciences" are the last people I would ever regard as remotely "trustworthy"! In fact, it's because of my own interest, private study, direct observation and personal experience of psychology, Nosce te Ipsum, for 30 years (self-educated!) that I learned just how badly screwed up the mainstream medical dogma is and therefore how to tell the difference. The dissenters and out-of-the-box thinkers in those fields are a rare and 'endangered species', but not extinct.
You're free to believe and assume whatever you wish about me, but you really can't know or understand me (or anyone else) if you don't want to.
Anyway, I'm afraid I can't see any relative comparison between something everyone has the natural, in-born ability to find and experience/prove for himself by choice and lies told by a controlled 'community' like NASA about alleged technology we cannot physically see or personally test ourselves.
I certainly appreciate your last sentence and can agree with itlux wrote:It is also my opinion that subliminal messages as well as covert occult symbology are used in corporate logos, advertising and the media in general. I can't comment on their effectiveness but I have seen a great deal of evidence that they are used. Even if they have little or no effect on the public it does not change my opinion that they are used which causes me to strongly suspect that they are believed to have some effect by those who use them.