Sunday, April 27, 2014

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370: The WHY Conspiracy Theories

Just more than a month ago I posted a blog entry on how intrigued I was with the "crowd-sourced problem-solving" phenomenon that people around the world were collaboratively engaging in via the Internet and traditional media. Certainly, it was a "faith-in-humanity-restored" moment in my eyes, as people all over offered all sorts of input into the investigation and speculation of how everything could have unfolded with the mysterious disappearance of Flight MH370.

Well, it's almost two months now and the blackbox pings that were apparently detected on the Indian Ocean have yet to genuinely reveal their usefulness, and even authenticity, as searchers had begun to use underwater drones to look for wreckage on the ocean floor. It would have really been a fantastic buzzer-beater moment, considering the fact that these pings were detected coincidentally at the supposed end of the battery life of what were powering the black boxes of the plane.

 *Image from

In any case, the HOWS of this unfortunate incident have undoubtedly been thoroughly explored and speculated on for weeks by the media and by mostly everyone who can pen thoughts on paper or online, with much of the globally-exposed citizens of the world wondering what could have happened; it's more so something that might occasionally cross the minds of frequent flyers when they board a plane.

*Image from

While certainly, this update is by no means any more extensive or expansive an addendum to the exploration of what's already obviously Google-able out there, frankly, the goosebumps I got from what I stumbled upon through Youtube urged me to throw the ideas out there further to those who would also stumble upon my blog. Consider them as speculations, conspiracies or unprovable yet genuine facts, they say sometimes, stories can be so strange and farfetched that they might indeed be true.

The REAL Reason Flight 370 Disappeared

Youtube - Western Journalism Channel 

*Video from:

Anonymous - Rothschilds & Malaysian Airlines MH370 Connection

Youtube - Dual Gamma Channel 

*Video from:

Of course, this blog wasn't and still isn't really meant for conspiracy theories, there are thousands of sites out there that will indulge the curious ones further than what can be fed from my posts, but this field of discussion is merely (albeit unavoidably, in my mind) tangential to my activities in analyzing what is seen or experienced out there in our world.

Perhaps the most appropriate posts that I've already made in previous years can establish the premise, the mindset, and understanding of the context we are subjected to given these conspiracy theories:

*Image from

*Image from

Okay, as a momentary sidetrack, in my quest to look for visual content for this post, I stumbled upon this picture and had to post an awesome movie poster of the Puppet Master (Toulon and his puppets, yeah!) franchise. Very awesome films by Full Moon Features btw, together with Trancers! Yep, there are still old B-Films out there worth watching.

The danger with selective journalism [AND EVEN COVERT OPS EVENTS THAT WELL MEANING JOURNALISTS ARE UNABLE TO EXPLORE AND VERIFY, DUE TO SECRECY AND OPAQUENESS OF FACTS] and the muddling of facts is that the truth is transformed into a half-truth. A half-truth not only sells itself as the absolute truth, but you can never tell which part is the truth and which is fabricated. Half-truths have gradients, which can be pretty hard and messy to sort out. A lie can be held as the absolute truth to everyone who knows it and if it happens that it is found out to be erroneous/false, then it will be dismissed entirely - 1's or 0's, true or false, black or white. 

In the end, the perception is transformed and aligned accordingly to how the orchestrator wants the scenarios and facts to be seen by people. 

*Image from

As what Slade Wilson aka Deathstroke once said (by writer Kyle Higgins and editor Rachel Gluckstern of DC Comics), "But the world has changed and there are no longer 'kingdoms' worth serving. Except one. It controls everything. It drives and motivates nearly every person on the planet. In the modern era, it's the greatest 'kingdom' of them all. Money. And in a world controlled by economic currency, where money is so important to so many people, the greatest respect for a what someone is willing to pay him."

*Image from

It's a frightening thought to think that there is no authentic freedom in a seemingly well oiled socio-political and economic framework (in my mind, I have characterized the current paradigm as the free-market democratic capitalist regime of price and relevance, and you, the reader, might have something different in mind). While, it is acceptable to think that everyone's life is inextricably subjected to the Churn, the idea that some among us, hamsters, in the hamster wheel system have accumulated so much power, influence, and faculties that these have practically allowed them to live outside the glass terrarium looking in, like gods, is extremely and overwhelmingly frightening indeed, and not even farfetched or ridiculous to not give credence to at all. It is after all the relativity of presence and control of the environment, we may all have swords, but someone out there has the sharpest all to himself.

It seems in the cloak and dagger arena, where almost anyone could be expendable pawns or collateral damage or innocent bystanders who would never know what hit them, merely victims of being at the wrong place at the wrong time, to the grander schemes of those who wield the most power, influence, facilities, faculties, and resources, whether in the formal economy or the shadow world, curiosity could kill the cat, along with other inquisitive animals daring to go further down that deep dark rabbit hole.

*Image from

All compositions, statements and opinions of the author are copyright © Earl T. Malvar 2009-2014. All rights reserved. There is no honor, respect, admiration, intellectual and academic dignity garnered through plagiarism.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

The Efficacy of Abstractions and Semantics and the Translated Manifestation of Kilobyte Noise

So I was having this heated debate with my mom a few weeks ago regarding the Catholic concept of transubstantiation and the perceived belief by outsiders of the Christian Roman Catholic religion that it is in fact a ritualistic commemoration of cannibalism (of Jesus Christ's body and blood) mainly due to how we ourselves (the Roman Catholics) interpret or misinterpret the idea.

*Image from

Now, a quick Google search on such an issue is obviously something anyone can do, but since this is my blog entry after all, I'll try to dissect it concisely through the context of my own understanding.

We can probably start off by skimming through a question posited on Yahoo Answers:

As already pointed out, transubstantiation isn't a literal means of turning unleavened bread and wine into human flesh and blood, although what really prompted the discussion a few weeks back was how my mother pointed out that all her priest-friends explained it to be indeed a ritual intended to turn the host and the wine into Jesus' flesh and blood in essence, since it is obviously scientifically impossible to make it taste like human jerky protein and vampire juice. In fact, Wikipedia re-affirms this belief and it is indeed Catholic doctrine that the bread and wine is intended or meant to become Jesus' flesh and blood when transubstantiated. The problem, however, is how this concept is disseminated to the lay members of the Church. Misinterpretations are abound.

I found it to be a half-baked principle taught by clergymen themselves, although they have obviously taken more theological classes than I have. I think the whole point of the concept is lost on the myopic view of how people should interpret the process of transubstantiation itself, while totally ignoring the big picture implications of the ritual. To be honest, the metaphysical aspect of transforming bread and wine into human (or divine) flesh and blood and then pointing out that it isn't literal but merely figurative is already a moot point to argue about. Yes, it is entirely about the transformation of the essence, but unfortunately, it still feels and seems like an endorsement for cannibalism if people insist that it is still about attaining a transformation of edible food into human flesh and blood.

While the principles had undergone scrutiny and debate for centuries, as I've mentioned, the academic rigor through which the doctrines are subjected to in the interest of bridging the gap between high level philosophy and theology of the learned clergy (especially then, when the academia was heavily concentrated in the Church's institutions) and the "simpleton's understanding" possessed by the layman, creates a transparent glass bridge that has often been crossed with the inevitable misunderstanding of the concepts.

I am obviously in no position to even challenge what centuries-old principles have conveyed to the recipients of the idea. It is what it is. And it's fine as it is, no harm done. The premises, arguments, and conclusions are already out there for a reader to ingest. 

I personally, however, consider it (while discarding the pointless debate regarding transformation in essence and literal intentions) a figurative gateway offered by Jesus to a higher plane of reality (in the line of science fiction novellas, whoopty do, bring out the tin foil hats) and the ritual itself is a gateway to access the Divine, even as it is merely a fleeting moment of belief in the mind of the participant, at the very least.

Now, this interpretation of mine is obviously wrapped in the context and archetypal mythos asserted by books, TV shows, and movies that imply the existence of alternate dimensions, realities, and higher planes of existence, from DC Comics Animated shows and movies, Rick & Morty, Ben 10, Adventure Time, TV shows like Doctor Who, Fringe, Sliders, Star Trek, and literary Universes like that of Stephen King's Dark Tower. I am absolutely amazed that the concepts and ideas of alternate realities and dimensions can be conveyed to young children already at this day and age. To think that adult lay people centuries ago (or even decades ago) would've considered the subject matter as absolute insanity and crazy-talk, just goes to show how far our civilization's understanding of the Universe has come.

Stephen King's Linchpin of Reality - The Dark Tower
*Image from:

 *Image from

And so we arrive at the meat of this entry blog. Even as information and opinion dissemination is accelerated multiple-fold through the Internet, do ideas truly instantaneously translate to any actual observable and tangible act? Well, Turkish politicians thought so or *ahem* feared so.

A few weeks ago, the Turkish government blocked Twitter access (eventually Youtube, too) and justified the policy by claiming how social media "fueled anti-government rhetoric":

As I've partially elaborated before in my entry The Diffusion of Liberty, Humanity Online , people who are online and have access to the vast amounts of information, context, and information that the Internet offers are probably and more likely to be the more enlightened members of our global society, if they are for authentic multicultural and multinational integration. The anti-government rhetoric that Turkish government officials fear is merely digital noise that may or may not translate to any physical revolution. Who's to say that certain statements are backed-up by a million voices? It's as harmless as an accidental eavesdrop on small talk that genuinely free human beings are entitled to. In my view, the threat is real only if it authentically manifests on an empirical plane, anything on the Internet is merely an academic invitation to believe in an idea or ideas. Moreover, any nefarious ideas, concepts, or justifications are obviously traceable and open for the free world to scrutinize, because obviously, in a society of order, most people value justice, peace, and structure. There has to be logic behind an idea before it translates to anything actionable or anything that's worth rallying around to. If something is "bad", then righteous people are obviously going to move against it. If something is "good", then righteous people are obviously going to support it. The keyword we rely on here is the righteousness of the participant, which as a point of discussion is something for moralists and ethicists to discuss separately all together.

In view of The Illusion of Cyberspace Perception , the concern is understandable. Beliefs and perceptions are molded by how things are presented, but as far as words and statements are thrown around, all readers/recipients of the message are supposed to be free to scrutinize what is presented to them. Truly free people are not zombies or drones who are easily manipulated on a whim just because someone said this or that. Truly free people are exactly what they are, free to think for themselves, but they can't subject any ideas, truths, half-truths, and lies to their thought process if they are restricted or starved from what their fellow citizens have to say. It's extremely naive to think that news bureaus, news websites, and blogs will be consistently feeding the authentic truth without twisting certain truths or transforming certain facts into half-truths or turn them into ambiguous ideas that mold definitive interpretations by readers as merely a toss-up. Words are powerful, but the efficacy is merely as strong as how much the recipient/reader believes what he's read: 

I, for one, am merely speculating that the blocking of Youtube was a conspiracy. Make it seem that national interest was jeopardized due to the medium, but disregard the basic fact that it wasn't of Youtube's own volition, but by some "irresponsible" individual or political nemesis who surprisingly was part of a "super secret confidential meeting regarding national security and Syria". Then they should have obviously identified who it was and castigated the guy then and there, but obviously pounced at Youtube instead.

And as Internet liberties are seemingly curtailed, I have only to conclude that this over-reaction against the channels of freedom provided for by the Internet is comparably pathetic to a childish reaction to an Internet Tough Guy's threats. That's right. The people in the Turkish Government are obviously unaware that abstract posturings and words on the Internet mean nothing unless they are genuinely true as threats:

Internet Tough Guy (ITG) (also known as “E-Thug”) is a pejorative term used to refer to an online commenter who threatens physical violence against other posters when confronted with criticism or trolling. Often found on message boards and blogs, typical actions of an ITG involve boasting about their physical strength and degrading critics with insults.

Someone who constantly talks about how bad and "hardcore" they are over the connected phone lines called the internet. These people usually frequent chat rooms and online forums for the sole purpose of shit talking and gloating to complete strangers to fill the void in their life, something that dosen't impress someone in the REAL WORLD. They also like to troll areas in chat and forums that contain such topics as: Martial Arts, Boxing, Fighting, Excercise, Weight Lifting, Wrestling etc. so they can compete with other lifeless internet whores for the sole purpose of determining who is the biggest nerd of them all. These people talk about how much ass they kick and how they could take on the world single handedly, when in reality, quiver at such ideas of someone who dosen't like them finding them in their parents basement where they thought they were safe. Internet Tough Guys should be regarded as the lowest form of life on Earth. 99% of the time they are liars, who will make completely bogus claims of being 7 feet tall, 400 pounds of pure muscle, and bench 700. Often they have bullshit stories to accompany such shitty claims like "I've wrestled a bear and a lion at the same time, and I kicked both of their asses with ease!" or "I'm a pro boxer who beat Mike Tyson in a backyard brawl with no gloves!" They often reply with sayings such as "fuck you", "i'll kick you ass", "your luckee that i cant get you", and the ever popular "where do you live and ill beat you ass". All threats by Internet Tough Guys should be promply backed up with "Try it with a nerd who buys into your tough guy bullshit".

muscleman1596732: i bet joo wont say that to my face!
muscleman1596732: ill kick your ass where do you live!!
muscleman1596732: i can take teh world on!!11
muscleman1596732: i kicked tysons ass and i no i can kick yers!!!111

by Joe August 30, 2004

*Image from
 *Image from
 *Image from

The definition and example above of course is merely a depiction of the concept. I'm not even saying that whatever the Turkish opposition feels they should be putting up in the Internet are lies and fabricated concerns. The point is, you can't react on whatever is put online on a whim. It is simply ridiculous. Jumping the gun only puts you in a bad light, whether making yourself look guilty or fearful of the truth (even if something is a lie).

All compositions, statements and opinions of the author are copyright © Earl T. Malvar 2009-2014. All rights reserved. There is no honor, respect, admiration, intellectual and academic dignity garnered through plagiarism.