simonshack wrote:It still makes me gasp in awe how most people continue to define the 9/11 imagery as "REAL / AUTHENTIC NEWS FOOTAGE"...
We humans are hard-wired to naturally believe in the reality of what we see. Life would be a living hell without this "architectural arrangement". Therefore, unfortunately, CGI will always be effective, no matter how exhaustively MSM imagery magic is exposed.
That's true to some extent. Yes.
I have been doing some yoga sorta stretches lately. And I stood on one leg with my head back, looking up at a ceiling. When I thought I could close my eyes, I would do so and quickly lose more balance.
When my eyes were open, I couldn't even notice the default corrective measures my body was doing to keep me balanced on one leg. Yet I could tell that simply seeing the ceiling was what oriented me.
The truth is that it's more about which senses taken together you exercise which gain strength together. Doing too much of one thing can eventually weaken that thing or make you too reliant on it or both. As a writer and/or visual artist that can get too wrapped up in visual work for long periods of time, I need to take physical breaks — bike, jog — sit quietly in nature and do nothing but observe and listen, or even nap, and things like that.
Being in a culture that is largely sedentary while it's contrarily rocketing its ass to and fro, afraid of smells and touch more than cultures that must use those for survival, and a culture which is practically deafened by constant airline noise, traffic noise, burping exhaust pipes, flashing screens and so on, we become extremely reliant on our visual input and loud noises. The scary "smart phone" era is one where this very unsubtle, overt, control-freak marketed handheld device is what is supposed to fill in any need for the "subtle"/quiet aspects of our lives.
This, however, also means (especially in Capitalistic environment where visuals aren't "protected") everything is competing for immediate, human (i.e.; based on our languages) visual attention. "Survival" nowadays tends to mean either the navigation of the visual environment to help us build a working visual
map of necessities and dangers or it means a slightly crazed person with alternative views hoarding guns. The present dominant cult is pitting these tendencies against one another and reaping the cream off the top of the fray.
Perhaps, as people knowledgeable about these things, we might benefit from sharing with others more sensitive observations. Non-visual input. Non-music audio input. Everyone learns differently, really, don't they?
See how fast the subject changes when in an urban environment and you try to focus on subtle things besides blaring music and memories of the latest visual explosion fest stuck in your head. Most people are swirling around in a loud, vivid, visual landscape and other kinds of inputs are too effacing of that culture, embarrassing or difficult.
I may sound like an old man but I am starting to understand all the old people's complaints that the world has gotten really loud and intense. Not sure that's an evil grandiose design or just a change. Human nature is to be drawn to stimulation, no? We are addicts. And our culture is largely the experience of a perpetual visual fatigue.
And then you have this other funny situation; people who really finally take time to relax and look at something with fresh eyes don't want to examine something "icky" like 9/11. To them, sensitive observations are a treat rather than a constant indulgence.
Those of us who are sensitive to a variety of things — good and bad — we must be pretty lucky.