#non-sequitur

[d-i-whitecards]

"The most un-spaghetti-like noises."

[notmuchtoconceal]

sarah palmer is learning about how to read german when she falls under the spell of the white horse because there is a DOPPELGANGER on the loose telling us about nature of the ZEITGEIST

TWIN PEAKS IS

TIMEGHOST

COAST TO COAST

[benoitblanc]

why didn't you tell me? because i didn't want to believe it. because i don't want to believe it.

[simsecret]

- Secrets Post #897, February 21st, 2025

[doodlebloo]

Man that podcast episode was seriously so good like I've already relistened 3 times and I'm still not over it.

Tommy being so impressed by DnP and asking for advice on how they've handled things re:content creation and Dan & Phil giving the kindest most sincere advice about finding what makes you feel happy and creatively fulfilled and making sure you're putting yourself first.

Gosh it was so fucking refreshing to see creators from such wildly different "eras" of YouTube be so chill and friendly and find common ground.

[searcherofamroth]

unsure whether I like this one... but as a top tier jopper I must persist

[propalahramota]

Me: *posts about another insane and evil thing russia's doing in their war on Ukraine

Crazy ppl on tumblrdotcom: Have you considered the crimes of the Google LLC, hmmmmm???

[tsuchinokoroyale]

NieR

Far

Where ever you are 🎶

[deer-a-day]

222

not this time

[d-i-whitecards]

"Mormon toxicity."

[dukeofankh]

There is something very odd and nebulous happening with language around the Trump administration that I think is bad, but obviously it's kind of a bird's eye analysis of a landscape that has a lot of variability. It's not gonna be universally applicable. Do not Bean Soup me.

Put simply, the discussion of the "flood the zone," "shock and awe" strategy employed by the Trump administration is starting to shift into something much less useful and accurate, in my opinion.

Like, obviously it is preferable, from the administration's perspective, that you feel too overwhelmed and attacked to do anything. That is true. But this has kind of bled into the concept of things being done as a "distraction" until we reach a place in the discourse where like...

People do get that the point of the Trump Administration isn't to make them feel bad, personally, right?

Like, there is a distinct strain of "own the libs" messaging, to be sure, but that is largely to shore up support among their own base. You, whichever marginalized identity or even just vague progressiveism you represent, are serving the same role that the Jews and Communists and Queer people served the Nazis. They just need a scapegoat, someone weak they can defeat to look strong and convince their base that something is being done. Making you feel bad is not, actually, the point.

But I see people saying that all manner of full blown legislative actions are "just a distraction", that "they just want to overwhelm you". And like...no. Trump does have goals. He is attempting to reorder the power structure of the globe, smash and grab and extort and put himself on top of, at the very least, North America, with Europe possibly pawned off to Russia to play with and with China contained as much as possible.

As part of that, yeah. They are attempting to eliminate the entire current civil government of the United States and replace it with one fully loyal to Trump so that when he inevitably refuses to accept the results of the next election, they wont remove him from power. This is all part of it.

The idiocy isn't an attempt to make you personally feel bad. I am trying to find a way to kindly tell you that you need to get over your main character syndrome and realize that they are not overthrowing the faux-peaceful post-war order of the globe to give you anxiety.

Take the Gulf of America thing. Was it just a "flood the zone" distraction? No. That doesn't mean it was a diabolical master plan, either. It was a symbolic spit in the face of Mexico, a country that they will almost definitely be invading within the next few years now that cartels are officially designated as foreign terrorist organizations. It also serves as a loyalty test. Google and Apple had to show that they are willing to go along with anything, no matter how stupid. They were. The Associated Press refused, and they've been barred from press access to the White House as a result. There will be hundreds of tests like this, and the punishments for being a normalass person will get progressively harsher and harsher.

Don't confuse the way that these actions make you feel, and the benefits that the administration wants from the way you feel, to lead you to the mistaken conclusion that these events are part of a huge plot, the entire purpose of which is to make you sad. Those feelings have no purpose. They aren't a victory for them if they trigger them in you, they aren't their goal, and they aren't something that you have to push down "or they win" or something.

Don't get sad. Get angry. Because they have a goal, and it's way, way worse than your anxiety.

[bfoxanimation]

"That's a more lukewarm reception than that time Brian tried joining that running club..."

[simsecret]

- Secrets Post #894, January 31st, 2025

[boom33713]

seasons 2 and 3!!! (and one from the intro bc i realized i didnt make one for it yet. oops)

less transformations this time, more other cool effects. i've noticed you usually only see the light effects when they're not in view, which was more rare in these seasons.

and a bonus :]

[smile-files]

a sketch of henry in today's outfit! flannel and corduroy is always a winning combo

[creature-wizard]

Critical thinking tip: Ask yourself if the "evidence" actually suggests what's being proposed

Many conspiracy theorists and fringe scientists will say they have evidence for their claims, but when you take a closer look at the supposed evidence, it doesn't really suggest what they want it to suggest. It's more like they're finding a thing and just claiming it as evidence without first demonstrating an actual link between these things.

A historical example of this are the so-called witches' teats or witches' marks that early modern witch hunters claimed were evidence of a Satanic pact. In reality, there are many reasons people can have bumps and blemishes on their bodies. People naturally develop moles and skin tags throughout their lives, or grow warts, or have extra nipples because that's a thing that happens sometimes. But these witch hunters didn't care - they just wanted to find people (mostly women) to scapegoat for anything that went wrong, so they just asserted these things had diabolical origins without ever bothering to actually try and demonstrate a causal link. And since these were the days before dermatology, you can imagine how easy it was to find these kinds of things on people.

Modern conspiracy theorists do something very similar. Let's take a look at the people who assert that an ancient Satanic cult is secretly ruling the world. In their mythology, so to speak, many shapes, colors, and images are claimed to be their symbols. The number of things these people claim are symbols are the conspiracy is so large that it's almost impossible not to see Satanic symbology everywhere if you start looking for it.

The Project Monarch conspiracy theory is a really good example of this. Many proponents claim that butterflies symbolize Monarch programming (ie, the alleged art of turning people into Manchurian agents), so if you see an actor or model wearing a shirt with a butterfly, if means they've been programmed. The works of Fritz Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler assert that regular everyday colors like red, blue, green, etc. are used for various forms of programming. This enables proponents to present a photo of someone with dyed hair and claim they've been programmed. You can see an example of this here, where a number of entertainers who dyed their hair green are claimed to have been given "frog programming." Also, if you read through the page, you can also see claims large chain jewelry is actually a symbol of enslavement.

You only have to stop and think about this for a moment to realize that colorful hair dye and large chain jewelry are just popular fashion trends. No actual link between their looks and this alleged conspiracy is ever shown. The only thing this page really succeeds in demonstrating is that conspiracy theorists are by and large a bunch of little haters who demonize anything that doesn't conform with their hyperconservative ideals.

Such is how this whole conspiracy theory works; if it exists, proponents will try and spin it into an evil symbol of some kind, to the point where it will seem that their influence is everywhere. And some people fall for this, failing to realize that this isn't any different from searching for witches' teats.

Here's a different kind of example: in witchcraft communities, you might hear people saying that if your hematite ring breaks, that means it absorbed a curse or some kind of bad energy. But in reality, hematite is a pretty brittle material, and if you regularly wear it, it's bound to break sooner or later.

Another one I often see are people claiming that if a candle flame burns really high and smokes a lot, it's some kind of divine sign. In reality, this is just what candles do when their wicks aren't properly trimmed.

And then of course, there are so-called ascension symptoms. For many years now (since at least the late 2000s), New Agers have claimed that a host of unpleasant symptoms are actually signs that they're about to ascend to 5D. Everyone's always claiming that it's going to happen in the very near future (December 2012 was a popular one back in the day.) But the years keep rolling by, and nobody ever ascends. However, the symptoms presented on just about any ascension symptom list you can find are associated with chronic stress, depression, anxiety, and many other health issues.

All of these things are forms of the non-sequitur fallacy - which is to say, the conclusions don't actually follow the premises. They all assert "if X, then Y" in some form without ever actually demonstrating a causal link between X and Y.

So when someone out there is claiming that X is evidence of Y - ask yourself: has a link actually been demonstrated, or does the preponderance of evidence actually suggest a different cause?