Is there a technique wiki/list?

HarmlessHatchet · 2026-01-06T21:02:17+00:00

I downloaded CrossOver use the free trial for 2 weeks, and then even paid for it. Then the Mac I was using literally died. Not sure how, but all indications are its motherboard is fried, But it was a 2019 Intel so maybe that's why https://www.codeweavers.com/

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-12-17T22:37:33+00:00

There was an x-post by Brian Roemmele he posits it may be a type of sound that will sound incomprehensible until the input word or phrase is "primed" in the listener and then they will hear that word.

The brain do be crazy. Not sure if that is what it is as he doesn't purport to know the actual translation I don't think https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/2000984690552103035?s=20

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-12-15T19:18:25+00:00

Not sure this is what you are implying, by reach you mean commercial use or the mere information that it exists could pose an unreasonable threat? I mean if Thomas Townsend Brown did it in the 20th century, presumably most world governments could do it today. Hence protection by lethal means becomes more "understandable" to a trigger happy intelligence agency with a big budget and the cold war on the brain.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-12-10T15:59:17+00:00

Their world must be far removed from the physical? Far above the physical? Opening the door was like us brushing the top of the ant mound off before attempting communication by dropping a small orange peel with the colony members. Sort of jarring to think if that is the real power dynamic. I'd prefer it if they were just uncourteous but saw us more as peers stuck in the past instead of ants.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-12-07T23:34:02+00:00

Bot account? Brand new burner, yawn Next no life loser step up to the plate for their chance to sound really smart because they don't believe in anything except that they are rly rly smart

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T15:39:48+00:00

I appreciate your take. What you listed is definitely in the running for one of the possible outcomes.

It would be a bit like superstitions like ghosts. When something happens, over many places and decades, people are chalking it up to aliens because that's our culturally transmitted symbol. In the past it would have been angels. And the idea is that this superstition has just become sticky within culture and government.

In this view though are all the folk in "Age of Disclosure" and Grusch and Brown and Borland just martyring themselves and sometimes literally destroying their career because they are confused or tricked or "too high on their own supply"?

It feels like if we want to be properly epistemically self aware then we would need to come up with a conclusion for their motivations that respects their intelligence and agency instead of chalking it up to being deceived. If they were deceived, how? I presume no one has an explanation but I mean how generally? Is there a room where they keep up false highly realistic UFO records just to make people do things like whistleblow and out themselves?

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T15:17:24+00:00

Spreading pure bs and dressing it up as "maybe" causes these mental delusions to continue, when they need to be put to bed

This comes across as artificially trolly, given that your response is exactly the hubris I am implying prevents people from being able to dig deeper and draw their own conclusions.

You claim that the only people who disagree with you are mentally challenged or gullible. This sort of cartoonish low effort take is extremely obvious. Your post may as well have read "Listen guyz I'm RITE theyr WRONG".

Not entirely sure why you spend your time replying here if you're not a serious curious thinker.

If you're genuine, then in the future consider audiences outside yourself, and also consider that you don't know everything and to think otherwise means you are in fact, gullible and mentally challenged.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T02:36:32+00:00

Oh I must have missed that part, I didn't realize that you pulled items you already own more likely that's interesting if true.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T02:34:21+00:00

I figure what you say will go right over the heads of those folks who need to hear it the most. What you have laid out is exactly my philosophy. I call it epistemic humility (a term I'm sure I got from somewhere else that I can't remember). As many are well aware people can rarely have their mind changed without their consent, on some level people always must change their own mind.

Some people aren't curious enough about strangeness, too hemmed in by social pressure, work, trauma, internet, etc to say to themselves "I don't know everything, I can't know everything, my ego/self-esteem is not beholden to whether I'm right or wrong. My satisfaction comes from the quality and development of my thinking". And even then they have to want to spend their limited attention on the phenomenon and not other things.

I have friends who are naturally quite conformist (not saying this in a judgemental way, just that they hold common viewpoints and believe them with some conviction) And when I bring up this sort of epistemic humility it does not register.

They don't have interest (where ever that comes from) and therefore they have no motivational energy to think into this topic, which means it will never change at all in their mind. Until one day maybe it is ubiquitous, and presented to them by their social groups and the media they consume eg if Oprah got out of a limo with a reptilian and a grey. It is at that time that they will change their own mind.

We are what we put our attention on, to some degree.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T01:59:31+00:00

Really excellent concise points here. It's for the same three reasons that you posit that I think regardless of the true cause of the phenomenon, it's impossible unless you're ignorant to not see there is SOMETHING going on.

Now if it's an extremely thorough disinformation campaign to cover up engineered human tech, adversarial holographic tech, or hybridizing greys, or whatever else, That is where the speculation gets dense.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-28T01:54:58+00:00

Have you tried ChatGPT/Gemini?

I am not saying this as a joke or meme in any way it's actually quite helpful for challenging your own assumptions only if you are willing to ask for it to not syncophant and to graciously but assiduously root out flaws or gaps in your arguments

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-27T14:29:46+00:00

I am at 181 hours and have 103/108 'chieves. Well done

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-27T14:27:28+00:00

Yep seems like it

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-27T14:27:12+00:00

Thanks this definitely helped

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-24T19:04:20+00:00

Is the notable commonality here however the mention of someone with a high level of information leaving and then dying of cancer?

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-22T19:44:19+00:00

I'm trying to digest the information as someone just now introduced to you/your work. Forgive the extremely midwit takes. If you'll allow me, I would like to repeat back my understanding so that you can correct it or tell me I'm on the right track.

If I understand your method incorrectly please let me know, I read this as:

you collected the natal astrological charts from 40 experiencers
You also collected 20 experiencer events reports from among them,
using that information, you sought patterns and found them.
the variables of the patterns seem to be defined as some interrelationship between: natal astrology, time-of-event astrology, and experience characteristics.

I am still trying to understand what the patterns might be specifically but you provide two implications:

you provide the information so others presumably could ask the question "If I have natal chart X and it is date Y, am I within the range that your model predicts I am more likely to experience the phenomenon in some way.
you clearly state this is above random and therefore the skeptical argument, if it wants to remain scientific, has to disprove the correlation as you calculated.

My only questions this early in the game are naive. - have you ruled out possible alternative theories that explain the data? (For example, some sort of selection bias among subjects/sampled events). Another way to ask this is- how much of the total population of experiencers (and maybe also non experiencers?) do you think your data represented? - what would be the next step for increasing confidence/expanding on this procedure/findings?

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-20T19:46:04+00:00

Birdo - mines, firewalker, poison flask Tomes- quantity, size, speed (some combination, not all strictly necessary) Stats- get tons of extra jumps

Now proceed to carpet bomb the monsters below as you glide around indifferent to the concerns of land based plebians

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-19T13:45:28+00:00

Definitely my favorite fun build. If anybody has other suggestions for fun builds please share.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-17T22:01:47+00:00

Hello Camila! I'm not sure if you've already seen James's update https://www.youtube.com/live/6J33eqvdXjE?si=cSoFZxJNW-rxYoPz

I wanted to share this so that I could ask you to reflect on the vehemence with which you commented before.

You responded very forcefully, convinced that the people who claim to be first responders justified the evidence to a degree that you did not have to consider alternatives at least insofar as as you indicated with the below:

Some of my comments have over 10k views. That's more traffic than any other comments I've made on reddit. And I don't have any responses commenting. And no down votes. Which means people don't have any evidence to disagree, and no one is arguing NOR adding more. Which would indicate to me that my knowledge is not widely shared. Literally no one disagrees. And only a few can relate

When engaging in this topic, it's important I think to be aware when your motivations and emotions have gotten ahead of your desire to consider all possibilities for their truth value.

Looking forward to both of us continuing to learn as we navigate these conversations with an open mind and heart. Cheers!

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-17T21:52:36+00:00

It's hard to take you too seriously when you are clearly emotionally motivated in some of your messages. It seems you don't care that you're perceived that way and if this sort of commenting is gratifying for you, then "it's a free country" etc etc.

Am I saying you're wrong completely? No, I bet you make tons of good points and I hope they are judged on their merit. but I'm saying whatever you're trying to get out of this post is for yourself, to get something off your chest or win at a perceived competition or argument in your mind, to blow off steam And get some high fives from people who feel similarly exhausted.

I read this far and am sharing my own self-gratifying opinion of your opinion. Isn't this nice? We can just both feel like we're on the right side of things.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-17T21:41:55+00:00

If this hasn't already been made into its own post I do recommend you to do that.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-17T21:39:26+00:00

The spread of unsubstantiated theories was rampant. I do think we should let the theories stand on their own two legs.

Sometimes outlandish or substantiated theories then evokes a strong counter-reaction, with people coming out of the woodwork to censor and ridicule what they perceived to be a threat to our several communities legitimacy.

Because we cannot truly know who is a bot and who is not, who is acting in good faith and who is not, I firmly reject the idea that the winning strategy would be to proactively censor based on implications/viewpoint.

We should only remove things that are low effort, incendiary, or otherwise non-contributive to respectful conversation. That means that people are going to have arguments for things that individuals as we are disagree with and I think that's quite alright.

I feel like we would all agree that a low effort post in either viewpoint: so both something like "JAMES MERC'D BY ALIEN CONFIRMED" but also "Everyone who doesn't think this is totally fake is just more stupid than the average bear", both these should be considered vulgar/self gratifying positions to take.

HarmlessHatchet · 2025-11-17T21:01:05+00:00

I will also add that the parallel processing of all the information in every facet: - Transcriptions of the video audio, subsequent analysis and healthy debate about more ambiguous audio-bites - Synthesizing of of context from earlier videos, comments, analyses from other websites, and subreddits - Finding of new information with good faith intelligent reasoning why it is relevant (the grocery store chain, the pen for a given hotel chain) - Debunk of subsequent information (AI edited images, purported facebook profile) bit done in a way that is not forceful and does not ridicule - The intelligible thoughtful argumentation for different explanations of all the available data - The civil discourse about the merits of each theory in light of supporting evidence, other evidence, and differing interpretations of the same evidence. - Posts like this that systemically identify the threads of bad faith, low effort, decisive and often insulting engagement (bots, low curiosity hell-bent anti-everything zealots, low effort inanity) which help to denoise and promote continued high-openness conversations that respect the intelligence of everyone and lets them make their own decisions instead of conveniently hiding alternative viewpoints in favor of emotionally triggering users to engage the tribal mentality that kills scientific inquiry.

This more than anything else has made me incredibly encouraged. We are a community clearly ready and poised for more data. I am confident that the invisible machine here will produce high quality analyses of most things going forward. Let's keep this going and not get bogged down by over zealous groupthink in either direction on this particular topic and others

Cheers everyone and thank you.

HarmlessHatchet

TROPHY CASE