I have,by this point, written about a scenario, explaining why I present it as ‘of the utmost importance’, as I find myself truly defeated by many things. That with the help, indeed of multitudinous actors, each highly independently responsible, as I, to my the best of my ability, continue to work to illustrate what is perhaps the epitome of a miscarriage of justice, with, by course, all its requisite contributing factors being extant (which constitute, I wager, plenty for detractors to latch onto, with whichever motive, or cause contributing to their opposition, and allegedly, ‘less than contrived’ reaction to whatever aspects of this are brought to their attention, in whatever manner). I have attempted to toe the line between an overly succinct conveyance of a situation which has been ongoing for well over a decade, with potentially direct influence to be had, theoretically, upon the lives of many other people, that fails to respect its complexity,and which I will assert is to some degree indivisible from the context of my early life, and family life, and going overboard in providing details, as well as analysis based in disciplines such as psychology or philosophy which I can’t reasonably expect my audience to take the pains to fully comprehend.

I have realized a consistent factor contributing to results equates to what may be called a ‘status quo bias’. As I have written previously:  What is essential, and indeed, would represent something of an abomination, is the effective, and ultimate, perpetuation of specifically that status quo of my being ill, suffering, and being hindered, on many scales, in my attempts to be productive, both through direct as well as indirect, means, to name just one example of which ‘status quos’ are being preserved, that is, under whatever auspices, or due to whichever motives, explicit or implicit. Maybe the perpetuation of that ‘status quo’, to the extent it is so that it is being perpetuated, is somewhat a function of the perpetuation of other status quos, which, again, may be rationalized in whatever manner (something I have discussed and will continue to elaborate, referring to ‘the ends justifying the means’, and of course, that that is actually so, objectively, is something I both doubt, and debate, herein and otherwise).

Trying to establish the idea that underlying facts, proclamations from whatever ostensibly worthy, or reliable, source of authority aside, support that the individuals involved, if not the majority of the populace at large (something that would be immaterial to my arguments, per se), provide, as manifested in their activities, involving these behaviors that, by course, affect me, and my life, however represented, ultimately, demonstrate psychological problems; accordingly, I have attempted to reference some terms and concepts from the discipline of psychology. Likewise, I do it as a means of  elaborating upon what I have observed as the demonstration, by specific individuals (many of who I have named) of poor character qualities, a lack of ethics, ultimate failures to utilize logic, as manifested in actions, that, for one thing, demonstrate how both the creation of ‘norms’, and the application of wisdom deriving from an idea that specific ‘norms’ necessarily represent ‘sense’ rather than something rather more base. It’s more than distinguishing between what is viewed as sensible, or relatively so, and what actually is, although that, as the idea that innovations can never happen if people fabricate evidence, or rely on hearsay, to determine that such couldn’t be, shouldn’t be investigated as being such, or should be suppressed as automatically as possible, through implementation, in policy, of reactionary ideals, is still a basic idea of import, that one would have hoped it would seem likely more would understand, particularly, more influencing others, in society, however these social orders actually came to be constructed.

One such idea is the ”fallacy of composition”, which I understand is when a process of ‘reasoning’ equates to believing that because people can do some things right, the other things they are doing are right. Again, this is phrased in a positive light, and given a more rosy connotation saying it’s ‘efficient’, or that ‘likelihood’ is being employed, and thus, conveying that it is ‘rational (enough)’, as I have alluded to. Of course, I too would like to shed light on some indicators of my ability, generally, to build credibility, but as I have said, it has been determined, seemingly, that ‘normal’ is right, meaning what most people do. Innovation is being quashed, for one thing, which has resulted in the facilitation of innovations being coopted and the credit and distinction along with it, resulting in further entropy, and a suppression of further innovation. Nor do these things, for what it is worth, demonstrate that I am perfect. I know I am far from it. I suffer from an at least fairly serious ailment, and I don’t believe I was raised with very good influences, for what it’s worth. I have, however, been placed, as fate would have it, in very difficult predicaments, that are nearly intractable, with almost no support, or where it has seemed to exist, little support that isn’t threatened by the very nature of the situation as it encompasses the history of the affair and its contextualization in society, as it were. To reiterate my initial point, the idea that  the passing of courses, attaining of positions such as professorships, or the other specific professions attained by the specific individuals I have mentioned, indicate they are acting reliably, or in a sane, just or rational way, very much can be seen as a huge problem of bias, at work, and indeed is a vehicle for rationalization of other biases individuals, or groups, might retain.

 The “IKEA effect” could be said to represent a form of an “escalation of commitment”. It’s something that might be applied to view, and to understand, either the actions of authorities at large, in the history of this debacle, or those of specific individuals, namely Michael Schilsky (as would be obvious, if the situation were as I describe, although people might say, ‘look, it shows how preeminent Dr. Schilsky is, there must be a good reason, and he must be right’), or the psychiatric community, whose work funds the psychotropics manufacturers, and of course,  it’s as if they couldn’t possibly, for one thing, downplay the severity of side-effects of what they administer, with varying degrees of correctness, or appropriateness (ostensibly), in order to administer those medications with more ease, to empower themselves, bulwark against risk of being held accountable for wrongdoing, etc.

I have mentioned how it seems there was an instance of bias present in the ‘convenience sampling’ of a group of medical patients found, by a study I referenced, not to have Wilson’s Disease, who that very finding served to objectively, in the eyes of the physicians who claimed so, because they ‘didn’t have WD’, show that patients without WD were ‘accurately’ not being considered to even potentially have the disease. Another concept elaborated as a problem in abnormal psychology I have noted, in those doctors I have specifically interacted with who treat the aforementioned disease, is ‘illicit transference’. The idea that the cadre of people already diagnosed with WD represents the exact analogue, not as stated explicitly, but as conveyed through other assertions, of ‘those people who have WD’. This came through with the assertions that I was ‘too well’ compared to their other patients, what I also consider a ‘framing effect’, in the sense that it anticipates that I believe myself a victim of medical malpractice, and refutes it by flatly stating not enough harm has been done (so, instead of considering if doctors’s actions would have harmed anyone, or if the actions of physicians have taken my life from a course of being quite healthy, and maybe well-off, and made it nearly the polar opposite, the physicians will maintain how ill their other patients are, and of course, we need doctors to treat the sick, something I will touch on below).  I have also, in previous writings, conveyed a theory that WD may be misconstrued to be a genetic condition if, for example, something like mold infiltration in the body was providing a vehicle for the Cu molecules preventing the elimination thereof. I also proposed that even if it were genetic, as is the established belief most do accept, it might be by far the most sound practice in medicine to provide treatment to patients who show signs of problems with Cu toxicity consistent with the zinc ‘maintenance therapy’ provided to some WD patients, such as because they may have, simply, an earlier stage of the disease than which diagnostic methods detect. I, also, have mentioned how it is that, by course, claiming certain people are delusional for thinking they are being affected negatively by the Cu they ingest is beyond irresponsible, and can present unique and overwhelming challenges to the subject of such proclamations, as to those, if any were, tasked with understanding why truly those claims are being made. Along with this, I noted, importantly, how the accepted scientific outlook had progressed to include people in the eighth-decade of life to be Wilson’s-Disease-positive, meaning, having a diagnosis if considered less than ‘a death sentence’, considered to represent ‘a horrific disease’ specifically because, I would say, when diagnosed it has progressed so far, in all cases, where in previous decades, all patients with Wilson’s Disease were considered to have little chance of surviving beyond the age of thirty. What it seems this must mean is that at age thirty, cognitive and other challenges may have presented due to what would later be seen to have been the progression (of the etiology) of the disease with which they would be, later in life, such as after age 70, diagnosed.

I don’t have the statistics on how many people diagnosed today, and, for that matter, yesterday, with Wilson’s Disease, end up needing extremely costly care, a liver transplant, for example. The costs to society of liver transplants are extremely high, donors are in short supply, and even living donors are used to save the lives of people who have Wilson’s Disease. I think it’s fair to extrapolate this has something to do with how late the disease is found, and although no one can ever be (held) responsible for this, ostensibly, because there’s some massive pitfall inherent in the idea of finding a way of potentially diagnosing more people with WD, aside from ‘that they don’t have it (necessarily, because the tradition isn’t to diagnose them)’, and aside from any gut-instinct that physicians, individually or at large, may have , that they have been doing it correctly, and should maintain the course (and gut instincts that they are capable people, their licensure protects people fairly well, where they see a way to argue that, and to, ultimately, win the argument, whether or not presenting accurately objective truths). This it seems would facilitate the more timely treatment of those individuals who later in their lives become gravely ill due to the effects of Cu toxicity. I am not sure if the reason is that people who have free-copper readings such as I have had of 30ug/dL “might have eaten something” as Thomas Schiano conveyed to me, but apparently, that’s the sort of thing that is standing in the way of what ostensibly could be progress, so far as I, at the least, have understood. (Although, to reiterate the fact, some may say it’s the unreliability of the serum copper reading, of which I can find no substantiation, for the article I mention above seems to offer the type of evidence that is used to determine serum copper is inaccurate, but taken in the proper widest-lens view of the context, also seems to make little to no sense; also, indeed, otherwise, it may be said the problem is the, from what I have seen, undocumented proclivity for serum ceruloplasmin readings to read artifically low, rather than artificially high).

It may be to many physicians’ chagrin, but it’s neither reasonable, objectively, nor ethical for others to fail to acknowledge that, even if they wouldn’t enjoy this job themselves, the liver transplantations, along with things like gallbladder-excisions, if nothing else, bolster the bottom lines of hospitals and medical practices. What-would-be the ultimately ignorant lionization of specific physicians should not cloud the rationale behavior of others in order to maintain a status-quo thanks to which physicians, if subconsciously, maintain yet another status-quo that could be seen to create a higher demand for those services they have undergone training to provide, and which such increasing demand, in their view, may provide them with enhanced powers, fiscal and otherwise.

A theme of the discussion, as I present it, as with the comments of those who I believe are guilty of what are, in truth, inhumane actions, be they seemingly banal, and my accusations of such, if facilely ignored, oftener than not, is the idea of ‘common sense’. Common sense is cited by persons such as psychiatrists to justify their behavior, has been cited by Edward Richards in court, in one of those several cases where he sought to relieve me of my rights. That and many other things that are said, in their context, on the other hand, can be refuted by common sense indeed. In fact, interestingly enough, usually it is implicitly or explicitly conveyed that the ‘likelihood’ is that ‘common sense’ indicates what a little or great (or nonexistent) ‘likelihood’ of something happening, actually, or something representing truth, which idea, I argue, constitutes a reliance on contingent factors, only being something a contingent has formed with an interest in doing. While, for others, to reiterate something I have written previously, the point seems to have something to do with failing to question anything (but my own competence, or the competence of persons who may be victims of others’ abuse, for example, thus ratcheting, necessarily, the implications or effects of abuse upon said subject), failing to ‘bite the mouth that feeds’, perhaps, or ‘faking it until they make it’, making money ‘I (or they) need’ or succeeding in some task I may feel a need for my own self to succeed at, is not what would be the underlying, if subconscious, motive (where I am presumed to be less than completely ignorant of the context in which I exist), upon which I ask, to make a determination. This again, precludes, or would preclude, a tendency to show a bias to the status-quo, and to perpetuate plausibly any and all circumstances related to the status quo, excepting, of course, in attempt with relation to one’s own degree of empowerment, fiscal and otherwise (which implies relatively speaking, in that social context). Thus, there’s an emphasis on ‘common’ by these people who have manipulated the problems of humankind, as I believe I have shown, to wield power, when, of course, nor do they have the capacity to wield it responsibly, and it’s not really sense. When I would allude to ‘common sense’ it emphasizes ‘sense’ that people might exercise to determine what is such for themselves.

Speaking of this, and acknowledging those texts I am aware of, some of which seem to resemble law, I will note again, where psychology itself, doesn’t at all uphold the behavior, be it widespread of psychiatrists, who, of course, we should acknowledge, can, or could, potentially, with their own motives, wield, opportunistically, their field or discipline, and assertions made ostensibly not only according to it, but according to what is legal, ethical, sane, and just, logical and scientific, much like one would wield a weapon. (Aside from noting, again the psychological problems many of them may have, for example, from being less than popular when younger in grammar school, socially not accepted, and how that might lead them to have a predilection toward demonstrating things have changed, which could lead to their, for example, either being accessories to forms of torture, or for directly torturing people, simply because they opportnistically act, for on thing, upon what is effectively, an alibi). 

“Normalcy bias” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias) is the belief that disasters are likely to happen much less often than do they occur; not to say, to a psychiatrist, a disaster of the sort that surely, according to what is physically possible in reality, might befall someone, occurs to anyone. It’s as though, it has seemed to me, given that particular professionals with whom I have dealt, where it’s not a disaster for them, that is concerning whatever is being done by figures of authority, it can’t be wrong, and truly such for someone else. You might even say, they are feeling good, given the status-quo, so, according to them it’s not potentially an abuse of power to assert that the status-quo is good, so anyone else, has to be viewed as aberrant, and diseased, without any other corroborating evidence, who disagrees. This is something I think people with creative capacities manyin the sciences lack, show they have a much handier capacity to showcase essential human characteristics like empathy, and even a sane outlook, based on reality, that is contingent, that is to say ‘could be anything’. As ‘the allegory in the cave’ maintains, people are limited in their perspectives necessarily. The metaphors stands for the less-than-omniscient perspective that is the only standpoint a human being can ever sanely recognize his or her self as retaining. On this note, I will relate that, as I related earlier, I had been subject not only to people like my parents, disregarding preemptively, any portion of what I said that they felt others would disregard, which I see as a form of ‘sub-logic’, but to being hacked very often while using my computer, as in a larger sense, somehow events tend to lead to the destruction of all progress I make in my life, toward some of the goals we all seem to share: having true freedom, independence, health, at the least, financial stability. Just now I have noticed that, well, maybe after all of this havoc stemming from the eviction led to my relaxing my passwords, a drawing I had on Linkedin has been removed. I was hacked on other social media services I have related. Although, most tragic, perhaps, have been the conspicuous, if potentially technically legal, as it were, actions of social media companies. After many citations of Graham Greene’s ‘The Comedians’ detailing life in an unbelievably repressive regime, a ‘third world country’ that you might think, from talking to some people I have, has as little to do with parts of the so-called ‘first world’ as the societies of bonobos do with the same, that totalitarianism perpetrated by ‘Papa’ Doc Duvalier, were summarily removed, eventually, as anyone reading this may know, the entire site was deleted. Along with ‘The Comedians’, another case where ‘fiction is strange enough compared to what these people consider, and affirm, if obliquely, must be the truth that it’s telling’ is Greene’s ‘The Human Factor’ where the plot relates how a member of Great Britain’s intelligence community is poisoned by his superiors, as it is related, in a case of mistaken identity, for being a double-agent and communist, with the rationale that going through the court system was too public. So, while these social media networks could provide not only for free speech, within the bounds of the law, and generally provide a collective intelligence that could sort through havoc and recognize what are truly, if unrecognized, entrenched problems in society, functioning to reveal the truth, rather we have them monopolized and then the responsibility abused, as plausibly rationalized in whichever way. In fact, Google+ was taken down in spite of Google-drive offering a gigabite of storage to anyone who signs up. So, they simply took down a service which allowed people to publicly store things, rather than privately store them, which seems to make little sense. I will also note, at this point, that when I was communicating with an entity called ‘Equip for Equality’ in Illinois that could provide some type of legal support, if nothing very powerful, against my dilemma, ostensibly, and being wrongfully medicated, Google+ at that time, happened to attempt to charge me $20 to use my email I happened to be using whilst communicating with the representative from that association, twice, the second time being after I had already paid the twenty dollars once. Soon after that, many images including those I had linked to in emails disappeared (and at some point between August 2018, and now, still more of the photos I had saved, including the photos of the materials I had removed from my ear, were all, somehow deleted from my computer, not the first time various image files had simply disappeared into thin air, in spite of my making considerable efforts to protect my information, almost always, in spite of my health problems which surely make such things harder, unplugging my computer from the wired network terminal I used when I wasn’t actively using it, etc.).

It’s the disregard of the kinds of minutiae involving the possibilities we can recognize from reading fiction, for example, (as opposed to being indoctrinated by what other people are doing as if we were zombies) and of nuance, in general, I have also wondered if might be best classified along with autism, or best classified with many people who have, or are diagnosed with some disorder best related, for the sake of conciseness, the autism spectrum disorder. When, again, whether or not others view that if they were to recognize certain truths, it would force them to act differently, how individuals ignore specific facts, such as whether something has indeed been disproven, or merely, that that thing has failed to be proven (according to whatever accepted conditions, for example). This happens to have to do with something called ‘the congruence bias’. It’s typical of the behavior of those psychiatrists I have encountered, for if they can, for example, say someone is delusional about being a victim of abuse (because others weren’t or where they might have been, haven’t managed to get their complaints widely recognized) they are, therefore, not being abused. They would claim they don’t behave this way; however, in this instance of my dealing with particular psychiatrists, again, whoever they might threaten, in whatever means for failing to respect that they have been accurate, for example, evidence abounds of psychiatrists doing so. Also, it’s manifest in the herd-behavior of individuals such as many of those I have encountered who are in possession of medical degrees, and some who I have mentioned in previous writings, relating to me, or others that it’s sound to apply to the scenario a logic stemming from that idea ‘if you hear hoofbeats…’ Not to say, once more, the metaphor is apt. Rather than debate that, I would propose a more appropriate aphorism, for those who can ‘read the writing on the walls,’ would be that related by asking ‘if a tree falls in the forest, does anyone hear it (do so)?’

To the narcissist, or the ‘control freak’ (wiki/Control_freak) it’s not their concern to hear ‘the tree falling’, or to know if ‘the tree fell’, although they may assert, propagating the ‘moral credential effect’ also known as ‘self-licensing’ they are the types who would hear ‘its falling’, if it did. In school where, ostensibly, , particular physicians who have disagreed with me, and according to my claims, have injured me grievously, earned those reputations of having expertise, or displaying excellence, as ostensibly they have rightfully earned such through practice, they have, in their eyes, developed experience. Being precise is the ostensible cause of success, achievement, and acquisition of prestige, both in school and in the workplace. Yet, in this scenario, alarmism, arguably along with the dehumanization of myself, accompanied by a failure to hear me, and utter discouragement of my speaking about, for one thing, my experience due, somewhat, to, you might say, the seriousness of having committed, on the part of one’s self or of others, has led to precision and correctness being eschewed as important, objectively. Yet, such terms being applied to whatever is done by those who reputedly correctly earned the preeminence they have exercised, or manipulated, remains the norm, while the castigation of my own self for having any problems of any sort such as medical, or psychological , any difficulties, etc. seemingly involving my having conceded that I face challenges, such as resulting from past what-would-be-abuse, also persists.

I argue that, basically, stated, sloppiness, is especially bad for a person who is ill if you who are inclined to presume things, to any extent, let alone to a great and escalating degree, thanks to circumstances, are controlling their lives This would be so whether or not those taking control feel they’re forced to make a choice, whether or not they  feel they’ve ‘gone with the odds’, or a best guess they or most others will make. It’s a following of certain precedents, as if they represent all precedents, and I argue inherent therein is the creation of absurd rationales, which to cite another more rudimentary way of describing what is happening, has to do with persons believing things are true because they say they are true. By extension, as it happens, because of the nature of the otherwise contingent circumstances, the more people do this, the more harmful the effect of each person’s misrepresentation, and the more all involved tend to believe themselves competent, and responsible, while, it merely represents, like the slavish adherence to ‘norms’ would, something which might be termed “ochlocracy”, or “mob-rule”, that is something else masquerading as ‘justice originating in reason stemming purely from reality’ because many people are involved, which has more to do with authoritarianism, than it has to do with (the ideals of) democracy.

I believe a lot of the sentiment is akin to the sentiment of those who advocate for communism. In effect, this is a situation wherein I am deserving of first of all, support, which would, I have claimed, be a manifestation of honesty, yet the activities of others, rather, work to limit any degree to which I might be rewarded for being correct, receiving restitution, have their consequences. Namely, indirectly, as a result of the more direct interference with what-would-be-justice having a reasonable chance of being carried out, causes the affirmations of, for example, the psychiatrists I have seen, to function like ‘self-fulfilling prophecies’ (let’s say, if I weren’t a victim of that insanity of my, as it were, abusive, parents, and could have a chance to be free from the injuries they help to inflict upon me, and  somehow collected the funds to recruit a lawyer or firm to represent me, and sue, that is if all the doctors treating WD weren’t ultimately making dishonest assertions, as I have described, how different the circumstances I faced would be, and would have been).

So, anyone reading and discussing this may, if not reciting the following verbatim, claim ‘maybe communism is right’, then (for what it’s worth). While at the same time, the rich (in funds, in recognition) leverage these resources, or types of capital, and get richer, or acquire, as it were employing my person, my statements, or my work, strategic empowerment, and then, as it happens, as I have described, the evidence of what specifically leads to these outcomes grows thinner, as these things proliferate which happen to consist of events that are calamitous to my person, my health, and my prospects. That is to say, the idea of ‘might makes right’ we see here, is truly anarchy, and people who are claiming to be strictly enforcing a policy to the detriment of the empowerment of the insane are clearly, objectively, massively hypocritical, when, whatever their intents and understandings, or inherent limitations, et. al., they are accomplishing the specific ends that they are, through their interventions and activities.

I feel, again, that what I have somewhat painstakingly described, if any could find the presence of mind to comprehend the full scope of what I am attempting to relate, shows that the reality can be seen to be most likely accurately represented by acknowledging that people have been indeed hacking me, as I have vouched, and deleting the things I publish. I feel a lot of these things indicate, likewise, inconvenient truths about our society: how if not sexual-favors, bizarre bonding rituals, undermine more  of what is recognized as success academically than what is objectively demonstrated as salient capacity in a discipline. This is aside from the outsized role played by things like familial support, or, conversely, how one may ‘fit in’ only as an outlier within, for example their own family, let alone society, speaking of where ‘norms’ are construed as almost exclusively important, who may be significantly more intelligent and capable of cognitive tasks than most or all who pass judgement on them, but are grouped with those of the lowest ability of cognitive tasks, through utilizations of  simple, facile, or essentially flippant admonitions, along with what are highly ill-considered pronouncements. 

I think that the unfortunate truth has to do with that scientists express something in a tone (of voice, otherwise, a tone communicated by diction, et. al.) that others then perhaps understand to be a challenge to them, and indeed, it would be so. The scientists thereby demand obeisance. There’s plausibly sometimes an element of sycophancy to the response, or perhaps simply what would be considered character flaws of people who have no true cause to agree, rooted in reality, but desire some aspect of the result their concordance works to provoke. When language has the ability to lay out specific ideas, and yet this is happening, as is indicated by the lack of a connection to reality, ultimately, in lieu of, as a true cause, having to do with that power granted to them by others who are equally fallible, there’s a problem, simply put. As I was saying before, things are like this, let’s say, and people may say, ‘well maybe it’s right that they are that way’ rationalizing what is happening, You might label, for example, something of that certain nature, ‘a kangaroo court’; well, if people, with some degree of authority, didn’t want it, who thought of themselves as worthy to do what they are doing, it would never happen.

That’s why I have mentioned that it seems maybe, for these physicians, ‘the ends justify the means’. Plausibly, there is a deliberate lie they may even think serves the greater good. As they, if they were to acknowledge injuries to me specifically, for example, of their actions, see them with rose-tinted-glasses. Of course, which reality they aren’t conceding, to allow a conversation about whether that is correct, because their methodology of doing that involves denying anything is in any manner askew. What I am describing functions, or would, as a recursive pattern, and won’t be interrupted until somehow people begin to acknowledge the lack of a logical basis for what is being done, the inequitable results, and understand the hypocrisy inherent in what would be the rationalization and validation of what is happening. 

On the topic of my hobby of rock collecting, which has been heartily refuted by my parents to be anything resembling what is sane (and I am not sure they can accurately be said to care if it were, by the way) was a discovery I made that, in a rock I had broken, the varying colors, some matching the exterior, were shock-melt-veins; that is, it would explain the resemblance, the shock melt-effect resembling the color of the exterior due to both melting in the heat. These shock-melt veins interrupted the cracking of the stone I conducted with a cold-chisel, and the stone broke with planar faces at right angles, some showing what I concluded was the true colors of the exterior matrix, and some showing the remains of the split shock-melt vein which was more susceptible to cracking, hence why it broke in a plane nearly perpendicular to the direction upon which the blow to split the stone came. Similar in coloration to those broken faces I identified as showing the matrix uncovered by shock-melt-’veins’ (they are called ‘veins’ because when cut, or visible from the outside of the stone you only see a cross-section of what are planar features, I take it), were bare spots on the stones exterior, as found, which revealed that inner ‘matrix’ through what seems to be the fusion crust, as described. (This is also the stone which was among those I afforded to send to Actlabs for testing, which was one of two stones I sent in, one of which was a granite, which although I failed to keep perfect records of which was which, seemed to be the granite, which is absolutely known to exist on the moon. However, people involved in prominent roles as academics in the meteorite community refute due to the higher likelihood they are terrestrial, or how low the chance is that they are lunar, the idea that they are lunar: what I see as a congruence bias, and it’s sort of like jumping to provide an answer, when really if better to provide an answer than to say nothing, it would be best to note the truth that it’s a known possibility, and more rational, as well as ethical). Such description of the sample has to do with my definition of ‘common sense’, and how I see it as something that can be used to ‘say what people can know’ themselves, that it’s a reasonably sound conclusion, rather than relying on the input, as if God made it so trained scientists were placed there so as to deceive us if they wish, for a specific purpose of course. (I made a link specifically for links to images of this rock, and further discussion of the rocks issue: https://thatiscapitalism.blogspot.com/2019/08/rocks-collection-image-links-8719.html)

Another thing, I argue, which the changes I have mentioned made to the Facebook site, which resulted in effacement of the dates images and information were published, is the prior date of publishing to what I argue is a rather blatant knocking-off of my work, by Bjarke Ingels group and Barcode architects in the Sluishuis. Again, the taking down of Google+, which was my method for publicizing after I was literally harassed off Twitter, in my opinion, by what appeared to be bugs, most likely intentionally hampered by individuals involved in the company (and Google+ seemed to eventually harass me as well, I had several instances where ‘bugs’ led to, for example, my publishing empty posts which of course wasn’t typically possible, additionally, there were formatting conventions which, if they didn’t format correctly, and I clicked ‘edit’, ostensibly just a bug, would show multiples of every formatting notation I had originally written, causing me to waste time repairing it). These images have been on my facebook page for a long time, and now I have shared some of them on the blogger post with links to the photos I made here: https://thatiscapitalism.blogspot.com/2019/08/building-resembling-sluishuis.html.

Once more, what is happening is ‘the rich get richer’, including those with degrees, gaining empowerment. Also, because of what’s happened, however you describe it (I have tried to attribute responsibility as faithfully as I could in previous writings), I wasn’t able to even consider applying to Harvard’s G.S.D. PhD program where I had visited admissions and been told my GRE scores were in line with someone who might have a fair expectation of being admitted. Well, I can’t say there would have been a guarantee I would have been admitted, nor that, if I had, I still wouldn’t have been plagiarized, but it might have allowed me to retain that credit for those innovations I have been responsible for, but because I was at risk of the terrible abuse and side-effects and malpractice accompanying what has been happening, instead I fled NH to Chicago, where I had many other problems to deal with, while, besides Massachusetts seemed to have an agreement with NH to honor the guardianship which had been delegated over my person.

Reminding me of some more things, that I think are of import, or at least interest, which were on my Google+ site, my dream of the throne room in the Giza pyramid, which, caveat emptor, I know many people will doubt it, and I blamed, at the time, the stress I was under, due to what I have explained, abuse for my not documenting that particular dream, when I documented many of them. It actually was dreamt by me before the news arrived, if I am not mistaken, in the media, that a hidden room was discovered in the great pyramid (fwiw). The analysis of the Paul Andreu terminal collapse (‘Five die as roof collapses at new Paris air terminal’ By Philip Delves Broughton in Paris 12:01AM BST 24 May 2004) . Therein the metal apparatus would have exerted a pull on the concrete, while expanding at a greater rate.That comprised of novel, to my eyes, analysis, after doing some research on the internet, and finding some other analyses of the features, but of course, it’s lost, once more, I would have to repeat my actions. Basically, the point of mentioning these things, and for example, the utility of actions like placing citations from Graham Greene’s ‘Comedians’ is that it allows for people to see for themselves, for example, the intelligence of others, rather than having to trust others, individuals, institutions and so on, to mediate the information for them.

That experience wherein I was caused to have an impetus to not apply to the GSD, is akin to Ed Richards trying to prevent me from having funds to file a patent by making me pay for the course I was signed up for, for what it’s worth. (Noting again, framing the incident without considering what I said, as some, it seems, will have a proclivity to do will acknowledge his ‘right’ to do these things). It wasn’t something again, when this bootcamp was agreed upon, that I was informed I would be using this money I was told by them I would have at my disposal, which I was paying to them as rent, to rent the room I am staying in that I was told I would contribute that money to. Seemingly, Edward simply got in a mood, as he always does, because he expects something specific, and becomes angry if he’s not respected, or given the strokes he desires, and decides to retaliate, as it were. I was told to go to work, and Ed Richards was picking up applications for Trader Joe’s, before they enjoined me to go to see Oliver Freudenreich, a psychiatrist whose name I have mentioned in an earlier writing, and who they have seen as they have gone to events held by the NAMI organization, who impressed them, for some reason. A member of his team, Dr. Corinne Cather, suggested I go to some sort of occupational counseling, or rehabilitation, with someone named Larry Kohn, who agreed with me that it wasn’t appropriate, or best, for me to be getting this type of baseline employment (at Trader Joe’s), and had suggested some still more expensive ‘bootcamp’ options than that web-programming ‘bootcamp’ course we found locally. Also, it’s reminiscent of when Ed W. Richards petitioned with Patrick Gilmartin to lock me away in a special home some ten years ago, before I went to Chicago, and, again, to reiterate, as I have described, according to all indications, continued to fall victim to what is criminality. That idea was nixed by the social workers at the Center For Life Management, by the way, as my mother, has maintained that I should be allowed to keep that money I intended to use for filing patents. I think this constitutes an effort by Ed Richards to at all costs, win against me, and dominate my life, and a continuation of his past efforts to the same effect. In fact, when, as I feel obliged to mention, I received the 135 on the IQ test administered by a psychologist by the name of Joseph, which, I note was after great stress being caused to me, and great disruption, indicating my parents had little to do with my success when I was younger (not to get into, for example, specifics about why my sisters may not have had the problems I had, eventually, or why they seemed comparably on a track to succeed, especially in the case of my older sister who graduated from Georgetown’s nursing school with a degree in public health, after beginning at American), Ed Richards told me his IQ was 135, which I still suppose to have been a fabrication he made, at the time (maybe no one will ever know).

I have worked to explain a lot of what has caused me to fail to fall out of the grasp of anyone whose actions would do me harm, and to attain more self-determination. Basically, I would state that what I have explained is sound, and should be believed, because it is like an equation. I would hope others could understand for example, that with the liver condition I have explained my reasoning for understanding that I have had, past and present, it would not make life easier, and not make it easier to escape, for many reasons, circumstances that presented a danger to me, a danger that I would then perhaps need help to escape, before I am injured still further. Likewise, the stress of being abused, as I describe, would create a massive disruption to one’s life that would serve, for those who labelled a person as insane, as more of a self-fulfilling prophecy at times. Likewise, that calling someone insane can be utilized by others to abuse the person whether or not that person is insane, in various manners. I also have tried to describe specifics alluding to when these things have happened to me, or seem to have. 

I acknowledge that all these people, implicitly, acted in manners that not only did they think were right, as they would be bound to argue if presented with an impetus to answer my claims, tried to preserve ‘order’. However, simply put, abusive people not only theoretically may manipulate their own authority and that of others, but have, which, again, is shown, through facts establishing that. Thereby those facts have demonstrated that the authority isn’t being exercised in a way commensurate with what was rightfully attained. That is to say, the facts of the matter establish that the very references to licensure, really have nothing to do with anything, excepting that something was attained, somehow. That which is then manipulated, with a result that people with problems, for devoting themselves, as people involved in organized crime devote themselves to their associations, to tasks, whatever they may be, centered on attaining empowerment, then must be able to control the establishment of facts, to their hearts’ content. Take for example, the ideas that I am both insane and attempting to conduct medical care upon myself: the reason I am insane is ostensibly having much to do, as it has been professed in the past, if not by Oliver Freudenreich, as I previously explained, my caring to oversee my own medical care, and the reason I shouldn’t be overseeing my own medical care, always had something to do with the idea that I was insane, for example, to find fault with physicians, when, as I have noted, the activities of physicians, involved due to whatever cause, in my care, would have worked to my enormous detriment, and indeed has, making it much more difficult for me to both have and demonstrate success in doing so, to whatever degree I engage in conducting my own medical care (not to say they have been alone, and, again, these ostensibly, and presumed, by others, sane actors, aren’t, have been believed to be at best as a result of something of a herd-mentality, and, according to the cold, hard facts, are driven by aberrant personality traits, if common, meaning it’s but a contingent reality that they are ‘sane’, or represent sanity, some sane portion of the populace, and did so, initially, or after I was proclaimed not to represent such).

Things like this have, contributed to enormously, if not directly leading to the incredibly injurious, and the painful and unceremonious event of my being evicted from the apartment I ended up, partially for reasons I have described in previous writings, squatting at as I hoped I could help, and be helped, to solve some of the trenchant problems derived from what I have deemed tremendous injustices, specifically such which would have haunted anyone subject to them, and which indeed have haunted me. It’s a very difficult position to find yourself in, to mention moments where you feel something somewhat incapacitated you. Whether it’s simply a massive amount of stress built up over many years, the lasting disenfranchisement relative to what, if people hadn’t been what they were, might have occurred in your life becoming exorbitantly painful, something having to do with toxicity experienced whether of a pathological origin, or otherwise. However, it’s simply the situation at this point, and I thought it was worth explaining again, in the context of what I have been writing, how it was also easier to imagine I wouldn’t be evicted because people would read the information, much of this nature, I had published on social media accounts, who were, in short, better people than those involved in my ‘care’ or who have meddled in my life previously, with the result that I wouldn’t be evicted, than to find new housing (for certain reasons, a significant challenge, without many of the obstacles presented me, I argue). Of course, I have said ‘if hindsight were twenty-twenty’ I would have known to focus more on moving, and not lose what I thought was of such great value, especially those rocks I had collected which seemed most valuable, or likely to be of significant value, to me (for reasons I have touched upon in a  more in-depth nature, previously). Indeed, being hacked constantly, I felt I was likely being constantly monitored online. I complained that this seemed to be the case, and also feared the apartments I was reluctantly able to find that would accept an application, would be applied to by someone else as I applied, such as with better credit. Call it a ‘conspiracy theory’ but it’s not that outrageous to believe I would be unwanted, or that people might want to do me the harm of evicting me, whether or not desiring to steal those rocks, which have disappeared, according to all evidence I have. Additionally, I felt I couldn’t be sure I would not be, as soon as I packed my things, brought to a mental hospital. Things like the reluctance to give up access to the organic food I felt I so needed, by moving farther away, at more affordable prices, contributed to the ultimately overwhelming frustration of the ongoing, situation, of course, the understanding of which has all been compounded by my understanding then, much of what I have argued in these letters. Again, not applying to more apartments than the single apartment I applied to, selling my bike, or even applying to city hall for rights to sell the rocks I had collected in spite of the fear it might provoke a reaction from law-enforcement that could be somewhat disastrous, in hindsight, didn’t succeed in preventing disaster by any means, but given the stress, it might be more understandable that I failed to move, given my account of much, if not all the circumstances, and understanding the kinds of thoughts that were going through my head at the time.

Continuing, on the topic of what is going on with my ear, since I’ve begun discussing that,  and feel I need to continue to clarify and therefore expound upon the topic. Another concern of mine was, during that time that preceded the ‘utter disaster’ of my eviction, as it happened, focusing on removing the things I had felt were in my ear, or, perhaps, emerging into my ear canal (and I wondered if this could be the case, because of the drastic effects manipulating and removing this material seemed to have upon my condition). I documented much of this on Google+, and again, the photos I had were somehow deleted from my computer with a huge portion of my photos on my harddrive, as the memory cards from my camera were lost being in the same box the rocks I valued most were in, as were the samples I kept of what came out of my ears, being stored in the door of the freezer in zip-lock bags. Doubtless my theory would represent another what-would-be-loaded subject, and one that I could imagine some people would wonder why I mention publicly, seemingly not recognizing that physicians would claim it corroborates what they (the majority of professionals I have seen in the field) have said before because it once again is ‘unreasonable’ (and I would say it’s a narrowing of reality to say they would know of these things because all the physicians before them, when, for example, not long ago physicians didn’t know, for example, cigarettes were bad for people; also the shudders described as ‘myclonic’, to name one of many things, it seems are far from completely understood, especially in light of my own experience with shudders, and what clearly can contribute to their occurence). Many things I have described make me wonder what specifically is the best way to describe the physiology of what is happening. For example, before some of the objects that almost certainly appeared on my floor after coming out of my ear canal were observed by me, I was plagued by excruciating pain in a side of my jaw. How this could simply be the result of something being stuck, say, between my middle ear and outer ear where what would be my perforated eardrum is could lead to this is beyond me. Also, adding hydrogen peroxide and continuing to manipulate these objects could drastically affect my condition, my mood, my perception of personal well-being, to name another example. Hence, I wonder about this, and I do it, again, in spite of whether, for example, my parents believe, or whether I have found a physician who agrees with me that this material is in my ear. I understand something limited, but there’s no indication, which represents objective reality, that, as I may be cajoled to believe (as I have mentioned, you might say ‘gaslighting me’), I am only damaging my ear canal, or something like that, doing this.

Recently, spinning, whatever it was, the “material” as I call it,  in my ear caused me pain in my neck and my upper left section of my back, which became quite severe, and lasted a few days. In the end, doing that more seemed to definitely contribute to remediating the same problem it had started, somehow, as I, based on past experience, figured it most probably would. This certainly preceded the onset of that pain, and was the only possible notable cause, realistically speaking, but still have my reasons for thinking that pain I experienced at certain junctures in the past, was caused by toxicity, as ingested. 

Additionally, something like a tic, a shiver or shudder, prompted clearly by hydrogen peroxide entering the ear, it becomes much much more common after I had the hydrogen peroxide, or for that matter, ‘ear clear oil’ constiting of some herbal essential oils and olive oil. The same also eems to also induce stomach or intestinal ‘growling’/borborygmus at times. There are also, after I loosen the material in my ear, sensations that feel like a muscle constriction. I don’t know if the capabilities of the eustachian tube explain this, they seem to. So, in spite of my not understanding why this ‘material’ clogging my eustachian tube, as it were, isn’t falling out the back into the nasopharynx, why I don’t feel more ‘taste’ sensations as I sometimes do as a result of my introducing herbal essential oils and olive oil into my ear, it would seem I can’t rule this out. Also, at times, I experience sensations of pricks in the ear, namely the material which I also can hear as I manipulate it with tweezers, and feel moving, and of course, sense that nothing is being moved.

On another specific occasion, I experienced borborygmus when I couldn’t move the object in my ear, eliciting the noises I describe (tics, or ‘thrush’ sounds I can hear when the thing responds and moves), or feel the sensation, but a marked correlation existed with that and the stomach rumblings. On another occasion, I woke up, soon thereafter, after a day of having moved that object around, with the same ear feeling ‘flush’ with whatever object is in there, according to my experience of what is happening. On this day, for the first time I have, I forgot my computer’s power supply before I walked to the library, a fair distance of over a mile. As it happens, I seem to recall such occurrences, of mental-fogginess, when I previously dealt with prior iterations of ‘the material’ which, hopefully, I then removed. But it may somehow (further) impair my liver function, and cause that problem, since I am, at a baseline, susceptible to the effects of toxins in the air quality. That’s also why I hope to improve my well being, including overall cognitive function, the consistency of my cognitive capacity, etc., by removing this material.

This is why, in truth, these ‘scientific’ assertions, as made legally-binding proclamations, etc., represent nothing more than mudslinging. The very history relating precisely how it is that the ‘education’ designated by degrees and licensing may easily be, if not being, frankly, likely to be, merely the trappings of education. Thus, it’s these things that have led to, and represent, so to speak, when speaking of certain individuals’ proclivity for accuracy, and precision, and worthiness to have their decisions lead, or provide commands to others, including law enforcement, they’re ‘punching above their own weight’. Ostensibly, this is because what is effectively nothing more than poor advice was something these people feel they were both forced to provide, instructed to, and, additionally, obligated to deny was such. Poor advice, such as telling a person they don’t have WD, or extrapolating that the person is delusional if they persist, or have responses akin to reacting as though they are being abused, because the patient can’t know they are not delusional, ostensibly, although the doctors will not say it’s because the patients fails to acknowledge the chance they are delusional, but fails to acknowledge that it is certain, although to reach that conclusion they have made analogous assertions based on ‘what is likely’. That’s not to say, instructing me that I didn’t have WD, even touches on the problems of the various affirmations made by people who, it has been said, both were correct to say what they have said (whatever it was), but were better prepared to understand A. whether I might have WD (considering what should have been considered to be of the essence), and B. (ostensibly also) whether it’s generally allowable as responsible to acknowledge, if known to be true, that I might have WD.

Like I have said previously: on various scales activities of others are disruptive. Not mitigating the idea of the most serious implications of the most serious acts, even small disruptions and ruining a person’s concentration, for example, or their routine, can be massive in its effects. Disregarding however many people may be involved, or who might have had a proclivity to do the same, that is, speaking of the objective nature of the acts, not applying to contingent realities of what is the truth of, for example, many people’s characters. Likewise, disregarding the idea that they are (necessarily) good, or meet a certain standard, and therefore are reliable enough to have this say in another person’s life, to disrupt (or further disrupt) them, and label it ‘positive’ because it’s not negative enough to be against the law, or maybe I should say, something that the contextual society might be likely to pursue prosecuting. What is left is the sort of thing the psychologist, I would say, is supposed to deal with, as I noted, it was my opinion and affirmation that the central thesis of the discipline of psychology is that abuse results in causing problems for the abused, such as, which abusers might then, or typically would, I should say, identify as a ‘fault’, projecting responsibility for society’s failures on to those they abused, with whichever motives, or as inspired by whichever inherent belief, or conviction, of theirs.

If a psychologist isn’t taking into consideration the possibility that they themselves don’t understand, because they wish to doubt they lack the capacity to comprehend, the status of how society has organized itself up to a given moment, their interventions are bound to consist only of  manipulating the context including the context of other persons in society, narcissistically. What this leads to is something diametrically opposite of what is supposed to be done in various fields, psychology and medicine. It’s also a way that, if subconsciously, groups and individuals can, whether blindly or anticipating who it is who might eclipse their own success, in whatever manner, if they weren’t to, if opportunistically, work to hinder that person’s progress toward achieving life, liberty, and happiness, as would be a rather inhuman trait to be found in some, if not all human beings, rather like a function of an overactivity of some aspect of the brain that represents something more like a reptile’s brain (I’ve read the work of a neurologist named Richard Restak, who compared the hippocampus to such), attack such targets (There would be some aspect of accuracy to what they are doing, in some cases, recognizing such a target, and yet, not a lot of accuracy in figuring out if it was something that was correct, even if they could rationalize it by never putting a ceiling on ideas like their own security, which would make it seem like they are guilty, and have that to hide). A lot of dedication to school work, or choice of various fields, as with cooperation between persons that transcends norms of honesty, and dignity, are things that necessarily don’t pay back society, for what a person, or persons have taken out, with whichever motives they have held, under whichever auspices they are operating.

Anyone could take these statements I make, in isolation, and thereby refute them quite easily, just as anyone can employ whatever words that are positive to describe their activities, and label, as negative, whatever someone else might do, not necessarily with any justification. The problems are so deep-rooted, the, basically, task of defeating the forces of malfeasance and abuse are nearly insurmountable. I have focused on the idea that it’s a contingent belief that the orders that come to police officers, whoever they may be, whether they’re people who clearly have an, if mild, variation of down-syndrome like two of the officers who brought me to the psych ward of St. Mary’s and Elizabeth’s on Chicago’s Division St. last December, of 2018, for example, come from a place of what is objectively sanity. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe famously said 'We do not have to visit a madhouse to find disordered minds; our planet is the mental institution of the universe.' A lot of this stemmed from multiple sources, again, which apparently contributed to confidence, if nothing else, of psychiatrists, as I have stated, again, a low-standard, that seems to have more to do with opportunism, if it’s the norm (and if it is, that only supports what I am saying). After again, what I described at the Art Institute of Chicago’s AIADO program, where, eventually my mother called in to warn the teachers about me, after I had told them the teachers were abusive, and after the teachers acted after I implied to them I felt my parents were. Having much to do with what has been said, repeatedly by Bernice Richards, who can, now, not listen to me, and again, has gotten away with her role with impunity, for what I allege is the failings of a system and of specific individuals who either don’t care, really, or lack the intelligence to know what it is to care, and properly act in response to caring. There was an assignment I mentioned where I employed the board a clay model was to be built on to represent the level of the river. Had we been told initially, for one thing, I have thus far, failed to explain, that the bottom of the river had to be shown in clay, it would represent something else, but we absolutely were not instructed to build up from the bottom of the river. Common sense tells us, again, it’s not important to engineering the work, in any manner and a client might prefer a model with, for one thing, the river’s water represented, but it was enough to not only give me a poor grade, but to fail me. This in a course, where the co-professor with Linda Keane, Ellen Grimes, as I recall like it was yesterday, for what it’s worth, communicated to inform the class, while ‘instructing’ where she might be found out socially ‘at The Hideout’. Along with that, at other times, Ms. Grimes informed up how ‘she didn’t like people with “I am a rebel” written across their foreheads’, a proclamation that seemed to have it’s analogue in Linda’s assertion that “(the building) River City will have to work around us”, “us” clearing meaning the class, which of course, she was the head of, and if she was to behave like a lunatic, had confidence she would escape castigation for doing, for some reason, and I believe both have. All among what was deleted when Google’s defunct Google+ social network was removed, for what it’s worth. Along with the witness I eventually bore there, to a student who passed, Marcus Owens’ jumping at a party he was invited to by his ex-girlfriend, and undergraduate in the design program named Maria, the new boyfriend she brought, along with his friend he made from Pilsen, someone named J.J (which I was the first to attempt to stop, when I was menaced by Marcus, and no one came to my support at that time, of the SAIC students at this particular Halloween party off Milwaukee Ave just N of the Division triangle, so, if I am correct, in the end, they broke this individual’s jaw). Several other things I wished to get off my chest, on that blog that no longer exist, include a report of a classmate from Boston College who’s now a ‘rising star’ attorney in California, Bryan Landgraf, molesting a female who had gotten on a table to dance next to the two of us, and another Boston College grad, and former pal of mine, Brien Hedstrom responding to a girl who mocked him on the street with no good reason, by whipping her around, whence she hit a car. All things, for what it’s worth, that I regret I didn’t handle better, and report immediately to the schools involved not like it would have helped. Ultimately, I can see, now, as I think others should, the drive Ed and Bernice Richards have to cause me to conform to being like them, something frightening, and difficult to escape, like those manners of abusive that frustrate a person’s escaping the influence of the abuser(s).

Anyway, These doctors know how especially when parents are in agreement that they either don’t care, or that the student is worse than the teachers, and they know that patients who are worse than their teachers but don’t agree, are worse than doctors. However, do they know if I am too insane to correctly realize things like how if some person, who is essentially a whore, were to perform a sexual-favor for another person, the latter is more likely to support the former, and has a bias? I think it’s a fair question, but it’s the kind of thing that will make people ignore all the things that are being ignored. In fact, many things, because they are a matter of degrees, are ignored. I am ill, so if I am made more ill, or even if I weren’t initially ill, in some manner, making me more ill, when rationalized can be totally ignored. If I am being made to interact with my family, while being coerced or forced to live near them, or live a life resembling there’s, well, if I might pollute somewhat anyway, what’s the problem if this leads to my polluting more, if for that matter, their actions serve to lower my health, and consequently my functional level of intelligence closer to their own. 

What I can say is that I seemed to have what was a responsible task, I was well-suited for, in Chicago, that a lot of people might have envied had I been able to carry it out, collecting rocks and, as it seems, due to reasons I have published in the past, including that Actlabs report I shared and described my own analysis of on, or around, July 9, 2019, identifying valuable meteorites among what most treated as trash, if it’s not that not a soul knew them to be more valuable to science, for one thing, than the refuse they were often treated as, collecting and cleaning these rocks. Riding my bike, and doing my best in very difficult circumstances to maintain my health. Polluting a minimum, also in heating-fuel costs thanks to the nature of that ground-floor apartment in a double-wide building, along with my efforts to reduce the draft, and things basically caught up to me, if people weren’t either presumptuous, or biased, like my parents, they might have helped me, but what is especially of note is how their previous malfeasance seems to have contributed to me having more of a need for their support, which of course, they provide only where and when it suits them, not when it is rational, or fair, to do so.