Writing about Investigations and philosophy

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The orders of the investigators are, that they should dare to make publishings, and here we must remember, that the investigations are not fake or real, until they have proven to be the truth or false. When we are writing about some cases, what is traumatic or first seem some kind of supernatural, we must realize, that in many of those cases, the reason for the thing could be some kind of crime. And the reason for making stories about haunting places and unexplained violence could be simple. The criminals can throw the humiliated animals on the yards and play some kind of voodoo-stuff, that they can make persons to move away from their homes.

And of course, satanism and another kind of stuff are not very hard to fake.  Everybody could paint pentagrams to the wall, and of course, everybody knows, that the Pentagon is the form, where is able to write pentagram, and when we are going back to the world of arts, inside the pentagram is always the form pentagon. This gives some kind of thoughts, why the form of the house of the department of defense is Pentagon. And then we must remember, that the airplane was made before Pentagon has been accomplished.

So didn't the military specialists, who created that house thought that the enemy could slip the single aircraft in the United States, and then attack to that house, what is very well recognizable. So this is very interesting, why the Pentagon is so well seen if somebody wants to use it as a target, and even the small nuclear weapon, what explodes inside that structure can destroy the entire building. But when we are going back to the world of science and philosophy, we know that science is not democratic.

Best and most well-known scientists can always the best equipment for proving their claiming.  And at the same time, we must realize, that the philosopher needs only the pen and paper for making the texts. When we are thinking about philosophers, who lived in the wine barrels, we must say, that in the real life that philosopher would not even be the real and living person.

Maybe that thing, where the philosopher lived in the wine barrel, meant that when some persons took too much alcohol, would they became very philosophistic. The philosophy is a strange thing. When ancient philosophers talk about "atoms" as the particle, what is so tiny, that they cannot be separated into smaller particles. This idea, what was introduced almost 2500 years ago is still very current because when we are talking about modern physics, we are always facing the thing, that we are thinking to find the "final element" of the material, but there is always founded smaller and smaller particles.

But the idea of the element, what would be forming all material is living strong in the mind of the people, who are working in physics laboratories. And science is a strange thing. It always bases the theory and proving some theories is very difficult. The idea of the philosophy is that the philosopher would not need to prove anything. And philosopher needs only pen and paper, or the good memory for making thoughts.

The idea in the philosophy is in rhetorics, the method, that the philosopher would confess people, that the thing, what this person talks are right, and the methodology of how philosopher stand behind the words, what this person uses is more important than the things, what are doing in the back office. What the person is told in somewhere else means nothing. That thing, what philosopher would tell right here and now has the mean.

If the philosopher has told something in somewhere before, that could mean, that this person has got new information about the thing. Maybe this person has read some article about the thing, what is written or told to the people. Nobody is an expert in everything in the world, and this is the thing, what we must remember every time when we are reading some texts. And the thing is, that I have no relationships to Russian high command, and I don't know have they planned to drop some micro-nuke to the middle of the Pentagon by using some commercial aircraft like Cessna, but this thought gave me the reason, for making a couple of more words in this text.

Why economics is not an interesting thing?

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Economics is the science, what is not very interesting, and the reason for that is this science doesn't look interesting in the media. Here is no particle accelerators and CAD-programs, when the economist is sitting in the room, and try to think about the mechanisms of the national and international economic and funding and how they influence in the groups of the individual people.

And here we must say, that the nations and societies are consist of the individuals. In the real world, economists sit in the boring rooms and on the table is a laptop computer, where economists make their texts, what are calling as the analyses. The reason why people would not usually like to talk about economics and economists is that those persons seem like boring people, who are looking at the numbers and lines on the screen.

Here is very much interesting things in the world, and one of them is the jet fighters, what is looking nice in some photographs. When we are thinking about the situation, that somebody wants to abandon the work, what economist make would it be quite difficult, if the economist would follow the things, what are made for the usage of the sources. And one thing, what is interesting, is that there are many predictions about the advantage of economics, but there is no way to actually make those predictions.

But then we must understand one very interesting thing about this science. There is no change to abandon the work of economist by denying the usage of some CAD program. When we are thinking about the influence of the economics for the peace of the society, we must realize that if the persons have no money, would that cause criminal behavior. And then we must take the induction step, and tell that if the person has no education, would that make this person vulnerable for propaganda and agitation.

This is the bad combination.  The reason for the war has many times been the will to get other nation natural resources under the control. Somebody has said, that the economic sciences are actually near of the philosophy. Here are many theories, what are well known and one of the most well-known ideas is the theory of the "Invisible hand, what controls the economics". The theory is made by Scottish economist Adam Smith, and this man created the base of the information warfare, the thing where faked news is used to control society.  But I will write more about those things later.

Could artificial intelligence have feelings?

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Below the text is a link to the music video, what would handle the idea, that maybe some civilization would transfer it's individuals to one thinking machine. In this scenario, the individuals would be connected together by using EEG-system, what collects the data from the brain core, and connect the individuals to the computer, where they are staying in the collective reality, what allows the system use the brains as the biocomputer. The reason, why we would do that is, that by using that method, could we create extremely intelligent computers, but the prize of those computers would be tough.


The persons, who are connected with computers are losing their personality, and become part of the collective intelligence, what is the digital version of the Brahman or "Soul of the world" what is the key element of Hinduism religion. This kind of visions is frightening but in the same way interesting. If we would somewhere in the future face that kind of thing, we must think that could that kind of things have feelings? And can we hurt the feelings of that kind of extreme large computer? Or is that kind of thing even the computer?


The living brain tissue makes it alive, and this is the thing, what we must understand when we are making biological computers. In real life, the reason, why we are using computers so much and why they are so sharp is, that they cannot create anything new. Because the computers would not have the ability for abstract thinking, they cannot create any own ideas. And because they don't have own thoughts, they cannot make the rebellion, except if the human doesn't control those machines.


And this is the thing, what makes robots so dangerous. When we are talking about biological computers, we are talking about the situation, where the animals or human brains are connected straight with the computer. The thing is, that computer gives this thing, what we can call as the "cybernetic organism" very great ability to make extremely difficult series of calculations, and human or animal gives the productivity to that artificial hybrid organism, what is the combination with the organic and inorganic things.


That kind of organism can have the ability for creating things, what we ever can think about. But there are risks in that kind of things. If we can connect human brains together, and use computers as the base element for creating that thing functional, we are facing the problem, that we don't know, what would happen if somebody of that group would have the mental problems. Could that thing cause, that the system would become dangerous? Is this the situation, that we would risk the life of every single human on the Earth? This is the thing, what we must think carefully before we are making those extreme thinking machines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzzbsdx06Fw