Duxon's Archive

After watching a few "near-death experience videos," I got the impression that it very well might be that the spirits involved in this phenomena (if there even are any and it's not just the inner workings of the human mind that continues to function at some level after the heart and lungs stop working) are actually fallen angels.

(On the other hand, I just read that a recent study found evidence of increased brain activity in people right BEFORE they die, which might ALSO explain near-death experiences.)

It was a few apparent common threads, such as the assertion that people choose what they want to work on in life BEFORE they are born, that led me to wonder if these experiences might not be the work of evil spirits, or shared/common electrical impulses that fire off as the brain shuts down; and why I asked simplified.com: What shared assertions do people who've had near-death experiences make about God, angels, demons, heaven, hell and life after death?

But, unlike the videos, the AI concluded that there are no commonalities, stating that...

There is no scientific or concrete evidence to suggest that near-death experiences provide consistent and shared assertions about God, angels, demons, heaven, hell and life after death. Near-death experiences are subjective and vary greatly among individuals. Some people may report having encountered a divine presence or experienced a sense of peace and love, while others may describe encountering negative entities or feeling a sense of terror. The interpretations and beliefs about these experiences often depend on an individual's cultural, religious, and personal background. Therefore, it is not possible to identify shared assertions about these concepts based solely on near-death experiences.

Then again, when I consider that some people seem to gain knowledge about people and/or events without any physical or material means to have acquired such information, the possible involvement of fallen angels once again demands my consideration.
 
Last edited:
Simplifed.com

Why do some people purchase gasoline from stations like Mobil and Shell when it costs less at stations like Arco?

There could be several reasons why some people purchase gasoline from stations like Mobil and Shell even when it costs less at stations like Arco.

1. Brand reputation: Mobil and Shell are well-established and trusted brands in the petroleum industry. Some people may prefer to purchase gasoline from these stations due to their perception of higher quality or better performance.

2. Convenience: Mobil and Shell stations are often located in more accessible or convenient locations than Arco stations. People may choose to pay a higher price for the convenience of filling up their tanks at a more convenient place.

3. Loyalty programs: Mobil and Shell often have loyalty programs or rewards programs that offer additional incentives or discounts for purchasing their gasoline. Some people may be willing to pay a higher price to accumulate points or receive other benefits from these loyalty programs.

4. Services and amenities: Mobil and Shell stations generally offer more services and amenities than Arco stations, such as car washes, convenience stores, or air pumps. Some people may be willing to pay a higher price for the added convenience or services provided at these stations.

5. Perception of quality: Some people may believe that gasoline from Mobil and Shell stations is of better quality or has better additives compared to Arco. This perception may lead them to choose these stations over Arco, even if the price is higher.

Overall, people's choices when purchasing gasoline can be influenced by a combination of factors such as brand reputation, convenience, loyalty programs, available services, and the perception of quality.
 
Simplified.com

Is the gasoline sold by Mobil and Shell of better quality or have better additives than that sold by Arco?

It is not possible to determine whether the gasoline sold by Mobil and Shell is of better quality or has better additives than that sold by Arco without further information or comparative analysis. Gasoline quality and additives can vary among different brands and individual stations within the same brand. It is recommended to check the specifications and additives information provided by each brand or conduct independent research for a more informed decision.

But, hasn't anyone already conducted independent research on the quality of gasoline sold by the various oil companies to determine who's best?

Yes, there have been independent research studies conducted on the quality of gasoline sold by various oil companies. These studies analyze the performance, cleanliness, and overall quality of the gasoline produced by different companies. They often compare factors such as octane levels, additives, and engine performance to determine which company's gasoline is of the highest quality.

So then, which company do independent studies analyzing the performance, cleanliness and overall quality of gasoline point to as being the best?

There is no specific company that independent studies universally point to as being the best for the performance, cleanliness, and overall quality of gasoline. Different studies can have different findings and may vary in their criteria for evaluation. It is recommended to refer to multiple independent studies and reviews to make an informed decision based on your specific needs and preferences.

What a lazy answer!
 
Last edited:
Screenshot_7.png
 
When I asked simplified.com about provisions included in the WGA's new contract, it couldn't give me an answer (just like it couldn't when I asked about which oil company offers the highest quality gasoline) so I had to go looking for the answer myself, which I found via vox.com...

The exact language of the contract is yet to be released. But from the WGA summary, it appears the union was successful in its effort. The MOA includes increases to minimum wage and compensation, increased pension and health fund rates, improvements to terms for length of employment and size of writing teams (which had been shrinking drastically in recent years), and better residuals (which are like royalties), including foreign streaming residuals.

The MOA also lays out terms for artificial intelligence, with an agreement that doesn’t prevent writers or productions from making use of generative AI but prohibits using software to reduce or eliminate writers and their pay. "A writer can choose to use AI when performing writing services, if the company consents and provided that the writer follows applicable company policies, but the company can’t require the writer to use AI software (e.g., ChatGPT) when performing writing services," the MOA states.

Additionally, "the WGA reserves the right to assert that exploitation of writers' material to train AI is prohibited by MBA or other law" — a major issue given many authors’ recent discovery that their work is being used to train AI owned by Meta and other companies.

Since the terms of one contract tend to set the pattern for future contracts, the WGA contract is likely to influence the terms of SAG-AFTRA’s ongoing negotiations as well as contracts in other sectors and industries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top