Forum

I read the link.

Why should I believe it?

You don't have to. If you disagree, please do so; if you think otherwise, please do so as well. I won't argue with you, as it's pointless to argue with someone who considers themselves a great analyst and knows everything. Do you really consider yourself a great analyst? ^^

It's impossible to prove anything to a person who knows everything; they think they understand everything better than anyone else.

Do you have any authority in your life? A person or source that you are willing to believe?

Do you only believe what corresponds to your understanding of things?

In general, what and who are you willing to believe?

The text is written with clear signs of manipulation – emotional outbursts, harsh expressions, red color, caps lock, far-reaching (and completely obvious) conclusions, a reference to some unknown person (who is Ekaterina Ulitskina?).

The words used – "manipulation of consciousness" – are usually used by those who manipulate consciousness themselves, or at least try to. Government media is the one that manipulates consciousness.

I didn't see any emotional outbursts there. On the contrary, there are dry figures that are quite logical and obvious. But your perception is very emotional and one-sided.

From what you write, I can conclude that you don't really know how things are. So why are you so vehemently and insistently claiming that everything written there is nonsense?

I've read a lot of different analyses, and so far, 100% of the texts written in a similar style have turned out to be nonsense. Perhaps the situation will change in the future, but for now, that's what I've observed.

Do you consider yourself a great analyst? ^^ Are you 100% sure that you are right and that these texts that you consider nonsense are wrong? On what basis do you think so?

Where did you get the idea that the texts that you consider nonsense are really nonsense? On what basis? What are the arguments and counterarguments? Do you even allow for the possibility that you might be wrong? And is this text, for example: http://rodonews.ru/news_1283520186.html, true? Or do you not even allow for that?

What style are you talking about? And why do you think that texts written in the style you have in mind are nonsense (do not correspond to reality)?

How does the style you have in mind imply that everything written in it does not correspond to reality?

Give specific examples of texts that, in your opinion, turned out to be 100% nonsense.
At least three, and why, on what basis, do you think they do not correspond to reality?

Furthermore, the statement "60% of the population of Russia is of middle pension age, 67 years old" is obviously false. That is, this "employee of the analytical department of the registry office" suggests that we should believe him on his word, but at the same time, in one of the points, he gives a clear falsehood. Therefore, the question of whether to believe him in the other points is simply answered.

Why do you think this statement is false, and even obviously false?
These data on 60% of the population of Russia of middle pension age correspond to the data of the pension fund. You can check this if you wish.

If you claim that it is false, then provide at least some evidence in favor of the fact that it is false. Why do you think so?

_____________________________________________________________________
It is obvious to me that everything written in http://rodonews.ru/news_1283520186.html corresponds to reality. There are a number of other logical and documentary proofs for this.

Vikk, you are either a very stupid person who is not capable of drawing conclusions, and yet considers himself a great analyst ^^, or you know everything about what is written here - http://rodonews.ru/news_1283520186.html - and your task is to convince people of the opposite. It is easier to control ignorant people who know nothing about anything. It is easier to lead them to the right precipice at the right time.

In general, arguing with a person who considers himself a great analyst ^^, and yet makes so many absurd and ridiculous conclusions, or with a provocateur who knows everything - is pointless.

Therefore, I will simply continue. Think as you like, believe what you want. Consider as you like. I have no task to convince or dissuade anyone. My task is to inform. And everyone should draw their own conclusions.

_________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0bsDZkNFs - a clip from Belarusian television news about GMOs and the infertility to which they lead.