Admonition: This is speculation, based on my own critical thinking and life experiences, so take heed. Think for yourself, or don't.

Assuming Elisa Lam died somewhere around Jan. 31st and February 1st, and they searched around the 5th or 6th, you have to ask at what point does her decomposing body's scent begin to waft strongly enough after the initial events. I remember you reading the article about people complaining of what smelled like a dying animal, all the way from the bottom of the hotel, street area. What on Earth. This is sketchy, shady, and bizarre to see them handle a case like this. All the transgressions just add up to make one more suspicious. The residents complained of a 'strange odor'. The dogs didn't pick up on anything [both within the hotel and on the rooftop, for f*ck's sake*–this is wrong–they found a hit near one of the fire-escape..._reason_ . I've got to believe that. She was a lit...

There would be no thoughts without observation, 'cause they rely on its contents, to deduce and infer–also–to guess, judge, abstract via imagination, etc. There would be no mechanic to avoid, ignore, distract, block out, intimidate, skew, extort, coerce, maim, torture, kill, etc., if there weren't–too–something that hurt a sense of identity, will to live, protect, and take. My difference in viewing, is that thinking cannot be pure illusion–yes–most definitely approximation and errors, but usually some hint of truth, even with those who don't know how to describe what they're pointing at with their words. From the word 'god', many come up with their own definitions–so it's not too useful for discussion–and generally, maybe you could flatten out all the references, to point towards some common thread of meaning, but it can make conversation more tedious and difficult. That's ...

You cannot see your own seeing, so consciousness as a whole is unverifiable as the only reality. Awareness has no awareness of itself, in other words. We are trapped in an inherently random universe, because there are no ultimate pre-determining factors for existence. So if things exist, they are, without reason. There is no way to prove any of the claims, since our mind's, intuition's, and perception's can only ponder in wonder, awe, dread, and fear. Though, perhaps there is a way to deduce behind the veil: My proposition is that 'a void remains a void, because it is a void', but this only works if things themselves obey logic, and it appears they do not. So, if there are independences of observation, there is no way to know–hitherto I have found–besides guessing consciousness is not necessarily telling us all the information upfront. There is no way to prove that it does. I still hav...

The forefront of the mind is what I call the deliberate thinking center, where most awareness typically lends watch. The background noise is like a foam rising up from these louder pitches which will require a bit more deeper tuning into to catch eye of; but I am sure you know the statements: ‘chatter’ or ‘TV static’ to represent it. To quickly verify what I am saying, repeat mantras or phrases enough times and your brain will begin to zone out eventually on the automated and seemingly inescapable ‘flowing river’ behind this all. Beyond everything here, I cannot say with absolute certainty; I imagine the unconscious processes take place which only a dedicated visit will retrieve. For me, there is another level, the voice commentary - also another hallucination echoing (audibly) my mind. Here ‘they’ talk about whatever decisions or musings I am doing or having; I am never fr...

Bearing knowledge can also mean bearing the ignorant of that knowledge, that is, if you don't want to share. Why would you do so? Power? Manipulation? Despair? Well, maybe people just don't want truth. They want hope–immediate distance–from the present, 'cause letting go of their views potentially means withdrawing from high-expectations and standards from it. So why bother helping those who don't want to be helped? It all comes down to self-awareness and acceptance, that if one cares to seek answers that are accurate, they would do so–instead of–resistance and restriction of their minds and hearts to new-er, updated ideas and modes.

Nietzsche, talked about this, he called it 'gradations and fluxes'–like on a spectrum–things or apparentness operates.

What can you do with someone who refuses to listen to what you have to say, because they are totally against belief of any kind? He sticks to his own views and world, and whoever does not reflect them, is immediately rejected, misconstrued, deflected, etc. With all sorts of psychological tactics being used to keep himself, locked in, unquestioning of the perspective–he–ignores everyone else. This particular person, however, goes onto blast other people, accusing them of being ignorant, self-sabotaging, and making excuses for 'the real truth'. Well, unfortunately, there's nothing I can do to help, until they want it. He is convinced logic goes nowhere and is not a useful tool for discovering knowledge. I can't make him see, show him how it works, if he won't even look! So my only options remain to let him be, come up with an idea so compelling [he is tempted to think for himself], or gi...