Conspiracies and Ripples
Theories, social commentary, political rhetoric and opinion are now taking precedence over fact and antiscience seems to be the new norm. This is becoming more and more prevalent among some very distinguished academic institutions and scientific journals who are swayed by the undercurrent of social discord - something that would have been almost inconceivable before now. The dangers are plain to see, and it would be foolish or short-sighted to think things will not get worse. If history has taught us anything it is that we do not learn from our past. Are these simply conspiracy theories triggered intentionally, or is there some historical precedent and reasonable explanation to what might appear short-term, isolated events?
A conspiracy theory is just a theory without proof – therefore, a ‘theory’. Separating the theory from the fact is the goal, but given the sheer number of stories, there has to be some way of assessing 'relevance'. We manage risk in some form or another on a day to day basis, either the assessment of it or the methods used to mitigate against it - our evolution as a species necessitated it almost from day one. So, we have come a long way from having to use that all-important skill of differentiating between the rustle in the bushes from a tiger stalking us, to what we rely upon today - or have we? The tools have changed and the methods of attacking or defending have modified massively, but aren’t things the same from a purely psychological perspective i.e. rooted in our desire to protect either ourselves, our loved ones, the nation or our possessions?
From one perspective, as we are predisposed to question and seek answers from the moment we are born and throughout our lives, it is likely this is where the seeds of a conspiracy theory start to propagate and draw strength – an evolutionary manifestation of the unstoppable questioning we as a species rely upon to survive. The harsh reality is that it serves the agenda of some people or organisations to denigrate or minimize the importance of a conspiracy theory dependent on the risks and consequences involved - in essence that is still a survival mechanism of course – albeit more of the ‘political’ kind. Also, questioning is by definition an admission that we do not know something and in turn (for men especially) that is often perceived as a sign of weakness – so the ego is such that if for no other reason than to fuel our defensive instinct, it is easier not to question the perceived wisdom and follow the herd. Indeed, many large organisations rely upon that fact which is why propaganda, media and marketing surges through the veins of society in such an uninterrupted way, and yet with so much influence.
Although none of this is new, in terms of the psychological backdrop, the subject matter and methods used for attack or defence are indeed very much new and innovative, and always adapting. So, before we ‘poo poo’ a theory as being simply a conspiracy theory and the ramblings of the weak or the mad, it would make sense to examine them just as theories first, with varying degrees of weighting which are currently unsubstantiated or devoid of fact. So, looking at the facts first seems to be the most logical and sensible approach after having filtered through the theory based on a quantitative approach to risk assessment, and a ‘weighting’ which is scored according to its relevance.
As a development from this initial foundation, there is another key determinant in terms of whether a theory or accusation should be investigated or not, and for us, that is the presence of patterns. Law enforcement, Intelligence agencies, or in deed many other organisations in all their various forms, academic disciplines, teams and departments, look for patterns. They look for a development of behaviour or sequence of events in order to add weighting to an overall risk assessment. What constitutes these “patterns” is another subject in itself and covered by us elsewhere in detail, but in a nutshell, one can look at it as a journey across multiple areas - starting with the collection of core data (intelligence) and transporting it (the Internet as the current means of doing so) to a credible and accurate identification of a pattern with a weighted score to reflect its significance. The various points this journey covers is the key – and that is why at this point in time, especially along the exponential technological curve, the risk environment is shifting in one definite direction – one which favours those in possession of those variables. Therefore, the use of artificial intelligence and now quantum artificial intelligence from organisations such as The XXXX Group and others, are proving to be so useful in helping us recognise these patterns and what determines a credible risk. Where organisation’s such as XXXX then pick up the baton in this journey is to apply current, innovative systems to predict how the second most important element in this process, namely “transportation”, will send the first most valuable element i.e. “Data” to its recipient. Anticipating what the next means of transportation will be - now that it is primarily the internet – is what firms all over the world are all trying to fathom. Again, that is another hugely complex subject and one that we cover in detail. But it is safe to say that the internet is now in its old age in web years. It was once a young, vibrant innovative addition, but not any longer. The same can be said for other off shoots such as IOT, WIFI, 5G, and even Biometrics for ID. The internet must evolve –but there are potential alternatives to this ‘transportation’ problem.
As an analogy -the fuse was lit in 1952 with Alan Turing’s, staggering article, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”. One might say, the ‘patient zero’ of the innovation pandemic that has infected the earth and changed it forever. So, WWW, IOT, 5G, are simply mutations of the original virus, not a new strain. AI is the current method of spreading that infection and does so by the internet - at the moment. However, there are several alternatives in the pipeline that do offer some credible alternatives, but there is a problem, and that is myopia. The sheer technical, scientific and logistical issues within each developmental area, means that the focus is too condensed and the ‘bigger picture’ is lost. Is that being managed, and can that realistically be centralised? The answer is, yes it can but at the moment it is most certainly not centralised globally – by definition. So, we are dependent on our nation and our allies, which includes the private corporations within them, to deliver viable solutions.
How does this relate to the conspiracy theory as described at the start? Well, that is where we have to apply our own decision making in terms of what interests us. At the moment, that interest is China and the ripple of events that have occurred over the last twenty years. This is our current focus and one which commands a great deal of our time and resources. However, working with some of the companies as described above, we are finding some interesting results and ones which we feel reveal patterns of interest.
History has shown that human beings never learn from the past despite making significant errors. This pattern of repeating the same mistakes is what makes us human, sadly. It is often hard to change, which is why developing a coherent strategy at this point is so vital and yet will not be welcomed unilaterally. For it to work there will have to be some fundamental changes. Changes based on logic and reason despite having to swim against the wave of emotion and theory which is currently in danger of drowning our extremely vulnerable and sensitive socio-economic and political balance. In terms of China, and now the Maoist references dangerously popping up in the 'antiscience' camps, and others of course, it will be a tough nut to crack especially if we really look under the bonnet of the twenty-year game of Chess that is being played between their nation and the West.
The game of Chess is interesting, especially in this context. There are many types of people who enjoy the game of course. They all play it differently, which is good – after all that is what makes it worth playing. Some will strategise to the point of madness and never make a move – some will plan endlessly and then panic – others will simply smash the pieces on the board in frustration. But – they all played the game. Now take away the Board.
“China – Our Prediction based on Facts not Theory” – July 2020
On a separate but not unrelated note, we have written many articles about a variety of subjects and often made our predictions and outlined what we consider key points. Two years ago, we were one of the few to direct the topic of Exponential Digital growth into some more ‘applied’ niche areas. At the time although of course we could not have specifically identified COVID-19 as being the “event” we discussed – it was nonetheless something we were fairly explicit about it in terms of warning. This material is still online, and we will shortly provide access for those who would like to read it. In short much of what we predicted has now occurred, but we are also starting to see the semblance of something else we discussed also at the same time, starting to emerge- this centred on anarchy and public unrest as also being likely developments. We would recommend you read the original article to fully understand the context. However, recent events and the concerns raised in the US about the ‘potential’ uninvention of, and threat to, the Federal system may not seem so far-fetched. Over the next days and weeks no doubt the various 'think tanks' will be publishing their opinions on the likely consequences of these seemingly unanticipated events – for us however this is the continuation of a long journey and one that started well before the recent Floyd incidents, or indeed even the Rodney King demonstrations. These events are not causes but the manifestation of a fundemtally flawed and outdated system that has allowed processes such as basic checks and balances start to deteriorate – almost beyond repair. The link here to our discussions above is that the ‘theories’ as they are put, predominantly social and political, are gaining traction ahead of what is the most relevant element, namely the facts. In this case, the theorising is injecting flexibility and “bendability” into a structure, the US legal system, that should never be subject to such intrusion. It is therefore prompting speculation of a threat to a system that would have been deemed impossible not that long ago. This in turn will become the pebble which we should all plan for and the ripples of which we really need to avoid. It has been said for many years that the really influential and more dangerous threat to our security is the digital terrorist, and it is a threat which has the potential to make ‘traditional’ threats seem minor by comparison. The perimeter has certainly been tested several times now, so it is no shock. On their own many of these issues are manageable but taken together and in a coordinated way (enter the ‘conspiracy theorists’) they would be overwhelming. This is not to say it is a forgone conclusion, and for us in the UK we are pretty well positioned – but before we do eventually revert back to making the individual their own technological powerhouse and decentralize, then for now we are still in a global market place. That being the case, we have to be much more cautious now about the new events taking place across the pond.
Finally, when news of COVID-19 first broke, we put together our initial views and again, were fairly public about it and published opinions online (copies are also available). What we have seen many times so far, throughout the pandemic event, is numerous reversals of tactics and opinions. Many will say, and with some justification, that this due to the unprecedented nature of such events. However, in keeping with the title of this piece, when facts were analysed it was the theory that took over as the key influencer which, for us at least, is fundamentally incorrect as it should be the complete reverse. The facts concerning the source of the virus, such as it being in Wuhan and by a huge coincidence also home to the Stage 4 Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory, were in this case dominated by the theory i.e. That is was a new mutation but one which was of natural, zootonic origin.
We begged to differ, or at least question this at the time as many did, and still do – so now as investigations start to add evidence to dismiss the ‘coincidence’ as being fact, this too is adding fuel to a fire that is already well underway. For those who might be interested…watch this space, but for now it will be fascinating to see what opinions start to surface from much more eminent and qualified analysts that I and concerning some of the points raised above. For the next two or three weeks at least.
Our intention from the start has been to try and connect the unconnected which, to many including ourselves, seems an arduous, thankless and frankly unrewarding task. However, the task remains intact and there are connections and patterns here that even viewed simply in the ‘now’ are statistically relevant. Add to that time and history, and what we have is something possibly almost worthwhile. Step back further and the picture becomes even more interesting especially when sliding together seemingly innocuous and unconnected events.
For this article we have taken a broad approach and ‘laid out the stall’ to a large extent – the next step being the connection of those seemingly unconnected dots. This will involve a combined qualitative and quantitative ‘multi-level’ approach and methodology to consider some of the institutional, organisational, technological and social factors raised so far.
Copyright © 2020 by Secret Intelligence Services
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” through the Upwork communications website.