A Formidable Tool at Your Disposal

Essential Addendum to My Previous Article: I have included it in the original one, too, but it also works on its own.

Sometimes a compact and simple tool is good for a large number of jobs.

---

Although I tried to explain this before, this time, I am doing my best to maintain absolute clarity in plain English, while maintaining my pragmatic approach and academic quality.

A frame of reference is a formidable tool at your disposal

An interpretive frame, that is, a frame of reference, provides the means of evaluating incoming data and information within a single plane. All it needs is a specific objective or a number of compatible objectives. The objective(s) is/are the fundamental premises¹ upon which the frame is constructed.

A bit more technically, it requires a deductive approach, during which thinking starts within the frame of a whole that is supposed to integrate the novel parts; data and information alike. As new data are coming in, they can slightly modify the details within the frame, but if they contradict the fundamental premise(s), either the whole picture is flawed or the new information is inaccurate.

Most people in the world, about 95%, are used to employing the inductive approach, during which they attempt to compile a whole image out of fragments. The process resembles the attempt of trying to reconstruct a 100-pice jigsaw puzzle out of 8-15 pieces. The method is a lot less effective than the deductive one, because the “whole” picture is always tentative and fragile, and doesn’t contain a control point that would secure its consistency. Any single incoming information can re-arrange the parts within, while the whole picture is absolutely unlikely to attain a reliable level of stability. Using a permanent frame of reference allows for conjecturing and logical predictions.

The tragicomical corollary is that, because most people cannot relate to the deductive approach, those who describe a whole (tentative) picture in order to establish a forum for exchanging and discussing information and assumptions, are accused of “generalizing,” which prevents any further discussion.

Nineteen out of 20 people are unlikely to use deduction, unless in extremely simple cases (e.g. trouble-shooting a car trouble out of symptoms and making progress by checking out details), but that doesn’t mean they are unable to do it.

When I evaluated events and data during the plandemic, I used the deductive approach, so my conjecturing is at least logical without internal contradiction. Did you also use one or allowed yourself to be confused by contradicting reports? If you used one, what did it contain? I’ve described mine before, but will add it again at the end of the article².

Sometimes a partial image creates the illusion of a whole. You can reconstruct the apple in your mind, but you cannot eat what’s missing from it.

---

My frame of reference and putting it to work

For my basis for deductions, in order to interpret the events of the plandemic, I accepted two fundamental premises:

1. The WEF’s publicly-announced Agenda 2030, which is aimed at forming a One-World Government that exercises total control over people by the imposition of restrictions on personal freedom through “health” and “environmental” directives that over-write all national laws.

2. The history of the eugenicist agenda, culminating in Klaus Schwab’s book on the New World Order, which will “not waste a good crisis” (especially because it was created by those who are offering to fix it) so that the “Great Reset” can be introduced without much public resistance.

3. The following image is circulating on the Internet, but as two commenters have already pointed it, out, it’s not from Schwab’s book, but from Dr John Coleman’s (he’s former MI6) 1993 book about the Committee of 300:

   https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/a-formidable-tool-at-your-disposal/comment/16487691

As long as the events of the last 42 months are evaluated in terms of how they served the globalist plan, everything falls into place.

Combining induction with deduction becomes a valuable method

Once the fundamental premises are clear, a lot of things that previously looked incidental start to add up, suggesting that a long-term plan is being implemented. This time, it’s possible to use the inductive approach concurrently with the deductive one.³

A few historic aspects also complement the picture, such as the financing of the two world wars, the history of over 160 privately-owned central banks, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a couple of global “investment” companies, the increasing control over the global money flow through fiat currencies that have no intrinsic value, a fraudulent “medical” paradigm forced on the people, including through “medical” training, global organizations gaining control over national policies, and even over a 100 years of compliance-training that has conditioned people into accepting the idea that they are owned by their governments⁴. The time has come to ask the question: who owns their governments? Again, the technocrats openly announced that through injections, they are going to turn you into cyborgs, and through their patents, you will become their property. The technocrats are the globalists’ humble servants, and they represent the new “priesthood” in an atheistic “religion” of efficiency in which there is no room for waste, redundancy, morals or ethics, beauty, of faith. Enforcement is guaranteed by the controllers of the money flow, the CBDC, total surveillance and mind-control, and a nearly totally mechanized and automated system that is supervised and operated by a central AI. Much of all that is already happening.

1. Everything depends on the reliability of the initial premise(s) that must be accepted by faith. Without that, systematic thinking is impossible.

2. This is the way I arrived at my current standing:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-path-to-my-current-standing-an

3. Notice that the method also excels at identifying disinformers and useful idiots.

4. https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/a-brief-history-of-compliance-training