ONE STOP SHOP as I have referred to in reference to the Operations being criminally conducted on American soil, against Targeted American citizens' without their consent, cannot happen without RESIDENTS within an APARTMENT COMPLEX or else NEIGHBORING HOMES - that TURN THEIR PRIVATE RESIDENCE INTO A WEAPONS FIELD TESTING AND TRAINING FACILITY.

What this means, the development of portable anti personnel direct energy, radio frequency ground based technological weaponry, and biology technological weapons, along with military grade direct energy electronic and cyber warfare weapons capability are ALL SET UP in an apartment or home that has direct line of contact into the TARGET AREA -

This means, that those residents allow their private apartments or homes, or apartment complexes to be turned into a WEAPONS FILED TESTING and TRAINING FACILITY. This is being conducted within A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX or ELSE SURROUND HOMES -

While the victims' private residence is used for TARGET PRACTICE. This includes the illegal, criminal experimental use of biological weapons - from which both residents and trainees' WHO SHOW UP form the OUTSIDE, are given or invited into these OTHER RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS - for TRAINING, AND ILLEGAL HUMAN EXPERIMENTING PURPOSES.

So, what is transpiring is that PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS are being used on American Soil as Weapons Field Testing Facilities.

At no time ever, should the private residence of any person be used to set up Weapons Field Testing, and then turn that private apartment, apartment building, or home into a TRAINING OR WEAPONS FIELD TESTING FACILITY.

I live in a private residence, I agreed to rent at a private residential location - I did not agree, to allow my private apartment to be used for Target Practice or the designated TARGET AREA - while other residence agreed to allow their apartments to be used for weapons field testing and training.

These other residents or neighbors DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHTS - to USE MY PRIVATE RESIDENTS FOR THEIR TARGET PRACTICE ARENA -

Therefore, just because other Residents have AGREED and/or ALLOWED their apartments and/or homes to be used as a Weapons Field Testing, and Experimental Training Facility, within a private RESIDENTIAL LOCATION - AT NO TIME EVER - does it give these individual's, the outside trainees', and most of all the TRAINER'S the LEGAL RIGHTS to TURN THE WEAPONS AROUND and ILLEGALLY and CRIMINALLY FIRE THEM INTO THE PRIVACY OF SOMEONE ELSE PRIVATE RESIDENCE. The RESIDENCE in Question happens to be MY PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOCATION.

It is a Misnomer, and Delusion to believe that just because the OTHER RESIDENTS of this APARTMENT COMPLEX agreed to either use their residence to house weaponry, to open the door to their homes as a weapons training and or experimental facility, gives any of them the right to then TURN THESE WEAPONS AND PROJECT THEM into the PRIVACY OF MY HOME. What these individuals agreed to, does not give them the right to turn these weapons and project them at someone else who at no time ever will or ever has given their consent to have done.

And, it is NEVER TO BE FORGOTTEN, that A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOCATION is NEVER, EVER SUPPOSED TO BE USED by the MILITARY, or Weapons Manufacturers or Developers as some WEAPONS FIELD TESTING, EXPERIMENTAL HUMAN LABORATORY, nor is the PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOCATION to be used for OPENING THE DOORS TO SOME OTHER APARTMENT or HOME as the TRAINING AND WEAPONS FIELD TESTING FACILITY -

THIS IS A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOCATION - PERIOD -

HERE IS ANOTHER BIOLOGICAL TERRORISM FIELD THAT HAS BEEN USED BY THESE ROGUE STATE AND CORP SPONSORED MASS MURDERER'S, WHO SOLD TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT THEIR COMPUTATION DATA WAS ABSOLUTE - THESE FUCKING BIOLOGICAL FUCK HOLE TERRORIST'S SOLD THIS SHIT - AS FAR BACK AS 2006 - TOOK THEIR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS AND SET UP SHOP AT SONY PICTURES ENTERTAINMENT, TELEVISION PRODUCTION ACCOUNTING AND PRODUCTION FINANCE - SET UP SHOP ON THE 22ND FLOOR AT 10960 WILSHIRE BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA - AND PEDDLED THEIR SHIT AS TRUTH - BUT HERE WE ARE AT THE END OF 2012 - AND IT IS STILL JUNK FUCKING SCIENCE - LIKE IT WAS THEN - LIKE IT STILL IS TODAY - THESE FUCK HOLES HAVE BEEN TORTURING AND MURDERING INNOCENT TARGETED VICTIMS' FOR YEARS IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THEIR WEAPONIZED SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGIES - BUT AT NO TIME EVER - AND I MEAN FUCKING EVER - DO OR DID THEY HAVE TRUTH ON THEIR SIDES - EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT THE FUCK THESE ASSHOLE BIOLOGICAL MASS MURDERING TERRORIST'S HAVE DONE - WAS TO SACRIFICE INNOCENT HUMAN LIVES - SO THEY COULD CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THEIR FUNDING, WRITE THEIR MEDICAL JOURNALS - AND SELL THEIR BULLSHIT AS TRUTH - AT THE LITERAL DEATHS OF INNOCENT TARGETED VICTIMS' -

November 23, 2012

Neuroscience: Under Attack

By ALISSA QUART

THIS fall, science writers have made sport of yet another instance of bad neuroscience. The culprit this time is Naomi Wolf; her new book, “Vagina,” has been roundly drubbed for misrepresenting the brain and neurochemicals like dopamine and oxytocin.

Earlier in the year, Chris Mooney raised similar ire with the book “The Republican Brain,” which claims that Republicans are genetically different from — and, many readers deduced, lesser to — Democrats. “If Mooney’s argument sounds familiar to you, it should,” scoffed two science writers. “It’s called ‘eugenics,’ and it was based on the belief that some humans are genetically inferior.”

Sharp words from disapproving science writers are but the tip of the hippocampus: today’s pop neuroscience, coarsened for mass audiences, is under a much larger attack.

Meet the “neuro doubters.” The neuro doubter may like neuroscience but does not like what he or she considers its bastardization by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.

A gaggle of energetic and amusing, mostly anonymous, neuroscience bloggers — including Neurocritic, Neuroskeptic, Neurobonkers and Mind Hacks — now regularly point out the lapses and folly contained in mainstream neuroscientific discourse. This group, for example, slammed a recent Newsweek article in which a neurosurgeon claimed to have discovered that “heaven is real” after his cortex “shut down.” Such journalism, these critics contend, is “shoddy,” nothing more than “simplified pop.” Additionally, publications from The Guardian to the New Statesman have published pieces blasting popular neuroscience-dependent writers like Jonah Lehrer and Malcolm Gladwell. The Oxford neuropsychologist Dorothy Bishop’s scolding lecture on the science of bad neuroscience was an online sensation last summer.

As a journalist and cultural critic, I applaud the backlash against what is sometimes called brain porn, which raises important questions about this reductionist, sloppy thinking and our willingness to accept seemingly neuroscientific explanations for, well, nearly everything.

Voting Republican? Oh, that’s brain chemistry. Success on the job? Fortuitous neurochemistry! Neuroscience has joined company with other totalizing worldviews — Marxism, Freudianism, critical theory — that have been victim to overuse and misapplication.

A team of British scientists recently analyzed nearly 3,000 neuroscientific articles published in the British press between 2000 and 2010 and found that the media regularly distorts and embellishes the findings of scientific studies. Writing in the journal Neuron, the researchers concluded that “logically irrelevant neuroscience information imbues an argument with authoritative, scientific credibility.” Another way of saying this is that bogus science gives vague, undisciplined thinking the look of seriousness and truth.

The problem isn’t solely that self-appointed scientists often jump to faulty conclusions about neuroscience. It’s also that they are part of a larger cultural tendency, in which neuroscientific explanations eclipse historical, political, economic, literary and journalistic interpretations of experience. A number of the neuro doubters are also humanities scholars who question the way that neuroscience has seeped into their disciplines, creating phenomena like neuro law, which, in part, uses the evidence of damaged brains as the basis for legal defense of people accused of heinous crimes, or neuroaesthetics, a trendy blend of art history and neuroscience.

It’s not hard to understand why neuroscience is so appealing. We all seek shortcuts to enlightenment. It’s reassuring to believe that brain images and machine analysis will reveal the fundamental truth about our minds and their contents. But as the neuro doubters make plain, we may be asking too much of neuroscience, expecting that its explanations will be definitive. Yet it’s hard to imagine that any functional magnetic resonance imaging or chemical map will ever explain “The Golden Bowl” or heaven. Or that brain imaging, no matter how sophisticated and precise, will ever tell us what women really want.

Alissa Quart is the author of “Branded” and “Hothouse Kids.”