All of us prefer to blame our troubles on other people or mysterious concepts, but every adult is in control of his life, not other people, the devil, poverty, or ignorance. If we had complete surveillance of a person's life, we would discover that almost all of the problems that he suffered from were the result of decisions that he made.

Although "ignorance" affects our attitudes and decisions, we cannot blame ignorance for our problems because it is our mind that determines what we are educated about, and what we are ignorant about. For example, our mind determines whether we are knowledgeable about Jesus or evolution.

It is also our mind that determines whether we can figure out if astronauts can see stars on the moon, and whether we are willing to accept the evidence that humans are a species of ape.

Likewise, the people who are in debt are not suffering from "poverty" or a "low income". Rather, they are victims of their decisions to spend more money than they have.

We are a species of ape, so we have the intellectual and emotional characteristics of an animal. As a result, our mind was designed to deal with the problems that animals face in their struggle for survival. Our mind was not designed to deal with the problems of our modern, technically advanced era. The result is that we frequently make idiotic decisions about what to do, who to trust, what to believe, what to be afraid of, and how to treat other people.

We cannot even make sensible decisions about food. All of us have made stupid decisions about food, especially when we were young, such as eating so much that we don't feel good. Although we learn from our mistakes and make better decisions as we get older, the majority of people continue to make so many stupid decisions about food throughout their life that they hurt themselves.

We don't need to do scientific research to figure out that most people are routinely making bad decisions about food. All we have to do is look at them and notice that they are overweight, and that many if them have trouble climbing stairs and bending over.

One study conducted between 2007 and 2012 showed that about 70% of Americans were overweight, and studies since then show that the number of overweight people has increased every year.

This survey claims that more than 40% of Americans suffer from constipation at least once a month, and almost 50% suffer from diarrhea at least once a month. Some or most of those problems are likely to be due to decisions that they made about what, when, and how much to eat.

About 11% of the US population has diabetes, although we don't know how much of that is due to a person's decisions about food.

This survey shows that a significant percentage of the US population has trouble controlling their food consumption during holidays, especially Thanksgiving and Christmas. There are so many Americans who have trouble controlling their food consumption during Thanksgiving that some plumbers refer to the day after Thanksgiving as Brown Friday. That should be considered as a disgrace to a culture, or as a failure of the culture, not as an amusing characteristic.

Many people are appalled by the Black Friday shoppers who get into fights the day after Thanksgiving, but the people who cannot control their food consumption on Thanksgiving are not behaving much better, and neither are the people who cannot control their arrogance and temper and get into arguments during the Thanksgiving dinner.

Our meals should be one of our major sources of pleasure in life, not a source for fighting over political issues or material items, or becoming uncomfortable from overeating.

If a boarding school were to provide the children with meals that caused 70% of them to become overweight, and caused a significant percentage suffering from diarrhea and constipation, and created a social environment in which they were frequently fighting with each other during their meals, we would consider the management of the boarding school to be incompetent.

When the majority of people in a society are overweight, and frequently arguing with each other during their meals, and suffering health problems as a result of their eating habits, we should consider their culture to be a failure. However, our arrogance causes us to resist looking critically at ourselves and our culture. Furthermore, instead of experimenting with improvements to our culture, our fear of the unknown causes us to repeat the same behavior day after day.

The problems we have with food are the result of having an ape brain while developing the technology to provide ourselves with phenomenal amounts of food. The fights that occurred during our meals are the result of having the arrogance of an ape, and their desire to fight for dominance.

In order to improve our lives, we must be able to understand and acknowledge that we are apes, and we must be able to exert control over our emotional cravings. We need to push ourselves into discussing issues with other people, rather than believe that we have the answers to life.

Our arrogance causes each of us, especially men, to believe that we are super intelligent, highly educated experts on virtually every subject, but in reality we are just ignorant apes with crude emotions and low levels of self-control.

We have trouble handling the freedom to select our meals, spend money, and select our government officials. All of us occasionally make bad decisions for ourselves and our family, but we resist looking critically at ourselves, admitting to making mistakes, and trying to learn from our mistakes.

Instead, we blame our problems other people, or mysterious concepts, such as poverty, racism, sexism, a death in the family, Russian influence, or anti-Semitism.

In the early 1960s, I and other children would regularly walk or ride bicycles to school, wander around the neighborhoods after school, without our parents worrying about us becoming victims of pedophiles or teenage gangs. Hitchhiking was a common activity for teenagers and young adults, and even some young children.

Today parents are afraid to let their children walk to school and wander around by themselves, and everybody is terrified of hitchhiking. There is so much violence at some schools that armed policemen are patrolling the schools.

Crime has been increasing during the past few decades, but not because of criminals, the devil, poverty, or a declining interest in the Bible. It is the result of our bad decisions. For example:

•	We have chosen to believe that we can cure a criminal with punishments, and the reason is because, as mentioned in many other documents, we are animals, and animals react to bad behavior by hitting and biting the badly behaved animal.
•	We have chosen to ignore the evidence that punishments cannot cure a criminal, and the reason is because we are arrogant animals who resist looking critically at ourselves and our culture, and because we are animals that are frightened to try something different from what we are accustomed to.
•	We have chosen to believe that the children of rapists, murderers, and other criminals are just as wonderful and precious as the children of honest people, and the reason is because we are animals, and animals have an intense craving to take care of all of their babies rather than pass judgment on their quality.

In order to reduce crime, we must suppress our animal cravings and experiment with culture that is based on scientific evidence. Although we are ignorant about human behavior, our experiments will allow us to learn about ourselves and eventually create a society that is so peaceful that children can freely wander around the city by themselves, including at night.

We could provide the city with a variety of recreational facilities for children, none of which would need armed guards. Parents could let their children walk or ride bicycles to those facilities, as the image below is supposed to show.



None of the children would be afraid of criminals or bullies, and with the transportation system underground, none of them would be concerned about automobiles. The city could allow small electric vehicles for exploring the city and surrounding forest, but they would be slow-moving, and have their own roads.

We could create a society that is so peaceful that young girls could hitchhike along the paths that we ride electric cars without any concern of being molested or hearing lewd remarks.

The concept of a city in which the men are taking care of the women and children seems impossible, but it is possible. We simply have to change the path that we are on, stop allowing ourselves to become victims of our animal cravings and fears, and experiment with our culture.

Many of us, probably most of us, regularly complain about the incompetence and corruption of the government, but most people don't make any attempt to improve the government because they claim to be helpless victims of the government, the "super rich", the military-industrial complex, the "deep state", or the "special interests".

However, the government is corrupt because the voters continuously make terrible decisions about who to elect to the government, and what they want the government to do, and they do nothing to remove the incompetent and corrupt officials. Many people refuse to consider the possibility that Senator Mitch McConnell is suffering from significant mental deterioration.

Every organization is whatever the majority of members make it to be. Every government is corrupt, and there are lots of abusive businesses, ineffective schools, and dishonest charities, because the majority of people created or allowed those problems.

The majority of people have total control of their government, economic system, school system, and other culture, regardless of whether they have a dictatorship, democracy, or communism. The public appears to be helpless for three main reasons:

1)	We want to be submissive to our leaders. We inherited the animal's craving to be submissive to whoever gets into a leadership position, regardless of how he behaves and treats us. This desire allows one Pharaoh, King, president, or Pope to exploit and abuse billions of people. For example, the US military leaders have told their members to remain silent about the 9/11 attack and many other issues. They told the military personnel that it is detrimental for them to "express personal opinions" and promote "conspiracy theories". Military personnel must be able to differentiate between following sensible orders and being tricked into becoming a submissive animal. The purpose of a military is to protect their nation, and that requires that they know who their enemy is, where their enemy is located, how their enemy is attacking them, and as many other details as they can discover. Discussing the evidence that the 9/11 attack was a false flag operation is not violating orders, being insubordinate, or spreading crazy conspiracy theories. Rather, it is analyzing an attack in order to identify the enemy and their tactics. Every employee, regardless of whether he is in the military, factory, or in office, should contribute to the welfare of the organization by pointing out potential problems and mistakes. When an employee has questions about his orders, or is concerned about some issue, he should be free to ask his supervisor about it, and he should be given intelligent responses rather than being reprimanded. The same concept applies to students. They should be feel free to ask questions about what they are learning rather than be told to keep their mouth shut and believe whatever they are told. In order to protect the nation, all the military personnel must be aware of the concept that their enemy will to try trick them in a variety of different ways. The military leaders should educate their members on as many of the tricks as possible, and they should encourage their members to constantly watch for evidence that they are being tricked, and to let their leaders know when they think they are being tricked. The US military leaders are doing the opposite. Although they allow their members to learn about the concept of camouflage, and a few other tricks, they suppress the military personnel who notice suspicious aspects of the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust, the world wars, the attack on the USS Liberty, and other issues. This allows a small number of military leaders to keep their members so ignorant that they can be tricked into attacking their friends and providing assistance to their enemy. We must be aware of our craving to be submissive to our leaders, and we must be able to control that craving. We must regard our leaders as people in a management job, not as Kings or Queens. We must push ourselves into being as critical of our leaders as we are a factory workers, and we must replace the leaders who are incompetent or abusive. We must be able to differentiate between being respectful of leaders, and being as submissive as a stupid animal. However, a person who believes that he is a creation of a supreme being, or that his mind is like a piece of clay, will not understand the concept that he has an animal's craving to be submissive to the people who are above him in the hierarchy, so he is not going to be aware of or control that craving. People today must meet higher standards for education and mental abilities. The people who cannot meet the standards must be evicted because they are apes in human clothing.
2)	We are arrogant and selfish. Another reason we believe we are helpless to improve the world is because our arrogance makes it difficult for us to look critically at ourselves and our culture, take responsibility for our problems, look favorably at other people's opinions, work together as a team, compromise on policies, and work for the benefit of the human race. We prefer to spend our time pleasing ourselves, regarding other people as inferior to us, and blaming our problems on other people or intangible concepts. A small, organized group of criminals will easily be able to dominate an unorganized gathering of selfish individuals. In order for us to improve the world, we must have enough control over our arrogance and selfishness so that we can work in a team, and for the benefit of the team.
3)	The majority can be outsmarted by a minority. One reason that the majority of people cannot be expected to do much to help the nation is because they are easily outsmarted by people who are more intelligent than them. Everybody is a random jumble of genetic characteristics, and this results in most people being ordinary or below-average in intelligence. Therefore, most people cannot make "above-average" decisions about managing their nation. Their low intelligence also results in them choosing something idiotic or detrimental when they decide to do something to help society. For example, some of them believe that they can stop hunger or cancer by donating money to a charity, and some believe that they will improve the world by pressuring people into joining their religion, becoming a vegan, or by purchasing a gun. This is a problem that cannot be truly solved. The only way to prevent the majority of people from being outsmarted is to have leaders who have the intelligence and education to notice when criminals are trying to outsmart the public, and who have the desire and ability to stop those criminals. However, that is not a simple task. How do we determine who among us has that ability? And how do we ensure that those people are put into leadership positions? Who among us will make the decisions about who should be in a leadership position? This dilemma is one of the reasons that this constitution is putting so much emphasis on leadership. It is also the reason that this constitution requires the government to maintain a social credit system, and the City Elders. We must pass judgment on one another's mental characteristics and determine who we want to influence society.

The "public" is a large group of people, and our leaders are a small percentage of the population. A small group of people cannot abuse a large group of people unless the large group allows the abuse.

The public is regularly abused by the leaders of businesses, government agencies, charities, churches, and other organizations, but it is because the public allows the abuse. They are victims because of their decisions.

For example, as of 2024, most people in many nations are still supporting Kings and Queens, and the majority of people around the world are allowing wealthy people to give their businesses, land, and employees to their children and ex-spouse, thereby allowing economic Kings and Queens.

Most of us believe that we are experts on food, nutrition, raising children, abortion, crime, choosing government officials, marriage, and other issues, but the majority of people make average or below-average decisions about those issues.

Every culture is promoting the attitude that people are "equal", but most people are ordinary, and half the population is below-average. The majority of people have nothing intelligent to say about any issue. Most people's opinions are ordinary or stupid.

Two examples of how the public makes terrible decisions about managing a modern society are:

In January 2024, The Daily Mail released an audio recording of John DeWit's attempt to bribe and intimidate Kari Lake, and his remarks are proof that the American government is being bribed, threatened, and intimidated by a group of criminals.

John DeWit reacted by resigning from the government the next day, and a few days later he released this document in which he explained that he resigned because:

Instead of demanding that her other audio recording(s) be released, and that the FBI or police investigate the corruption, many journalists reacted by trying to make it appear as if the audio recordings were insignificant. For example, Laura Gersony suggested that the recordings were "political theater" rather than "exposing corruption".

The FBI, police departments, US government officials, and almost everybody else in an influential position of the USA also ignored or minimized the recordings. Some people complained that the conversation took place more than 10 months ago, which implies that a crime that is more than 10 months old is no longer of importance. The Jews tell us to never forget, but all of the Jews want us to forget about this crime.

Furthermore, Kari Lake, and the people who work with her, such as Carolyn Wren and Garrett Ventry, are also remaining silent about the corruption rather than demanding an investigation. Their silence implies that they have been intimidated, persuaded, or tricked into silence by some organization, such as the FBI, military, or NSA, or that Kari Lake exposed the corruption only to make DeWit resign, which would mean that she used the crime as a tool for her benefit, not to expose or stop corruption, or to improve the nation.

Our government is corrupt because the voters, police, and other people do nothing to stop the corruption.

Kari Lake's recordings are proof of corruption, but the majority of American people do not care.

The public also doesn't care why the FBI, journalists, and police agencies are ignoring the corruption, or minimizing the significance of the audio recordings.

Many people during the past century have provided the public with evidence that we have been lied to about wars, the sinking of the Titanic, the Federal Reserve, the creation of Israel, the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust, the Apollo moon landing, and other issues, but the majority of people ignore or ridicule the evidence.

An organization can only be as good as its members can make it. It is impossible to eliminate corruption when the majority of people ignore or ridicule the evidence that people in influential positions are involved with crime.

There have been many crimes in which the police collected DNA of the criminal, but did not know who it belonged to because no culture authorizes the government to create a database of everybody's DNA.

In 2006, some citizens became so angry about the lack of a DNA database that they pressured the New Mexico state government into passing "Katie’s Law" that allowed the police to collect a DNA sample of anyone arrested on for "violent" felony. That law was altered in 2011 to allow DNA samples for all felonies.

Years later some citizens in Nevada became angry, and they pressured the Nevada government into passing "Brianna's Law", which requires the police to collect DNA samples from people arrested for a felony.

Other states have passed similar laws. Although those laws might seem to be examples of citizens who are so concerned about society that they get involved with trying to improve it, the laws are actually examples of how:

•

Our emotions are inappropriate today. As discussed here, we are so selfish that we don't care about a problem until it irritates us. For example, the people who demanded Katie's law had no concern about DNA databases until Katie was murdered. Likewise, the people who demanded Brianna's Law had no concern until Brianna was murdered.

•

People today need more intelligence. As of 2024, many states now have laws that are similar to Brianna's Law and Katie's Law, but those laws allow collecting DNA from only people convicted of felonies. Two problems with those laws are: 1) The police can get a DNA sample of a person only after he commits a felony, and only if the police are successful in arresting him for the crime. Therefore, the first time a person commits a felony, the police will not be able to identify him because he won't yet have his DNA in the database. This allows him to commit more crimes. 2) A criminal who is only caught while committing misdemeanors never has to give a DNA sample, which makes it easy for him to get away with committing more misdemeanors. If he decides to commit a felony, the police will not have a sample of his DNA to identify him.. It is more beneficial for us to regard our DNA as as "identification" technique, similar to how we put a photograph of our face on our driver's license, and how we regard fingerprints as identification. The police should have a DNA sample of everybody. We do not allow people to keep their face a secret, and we should not allow people to keep their genetic information a secret. However, most people have such a resistance to thinking, such low intelligence, and/or such an inadequate education, that they cannot understand the value of having a database of everybody's DNA. Furthermore, most people have such a strong craving to be submissive to their leaders that they allow their leaders to promote the concept that our DNA is "personal" or "private" information that should be kept secret. Not many people have the ability to look critically at their leaders or their culture, so there are not many people discussing such issues as: 1) How will we be harmed by having a DNA database of everybody? 2) Wouldn't a DNA database protect innocent people by reducing the chances that they are accidentally considered guilty of a crime? 3) Many state governments force us to put our automobiles through routine smog inspections, even if we've only driven a few thousand miles since the last inspection. The officials don't have any evidence that the inspections are providing benefits that outweigh the disadvantages, but they force us to do them anyway. By comparison, we would benefit tremendously by having a national database of DNA, but the governments refuse to authorize it. Why are they more concerned with inspecting automobiles than in reducing crime? Do they truly believe that our DNA should be kept secret? Or are they afraid that a DNA database will expose the crimes that they and their friends are involved with?

The majority of people are incapable of making wise decisions about DNA, crime, and every other problem of a modern society.

The human mind evolved for the life of a nomadic tribe, and although we have undergone some evolutionary changes during the past few thousand years, none of us have a mind that has been completely adapted to this modern era.

Most people have a mind that is designed for the simple life of perhaps 5000 BC, and nobody has a mind that has evolved for 2024.

If we could measure the intellectual and emotional characteristics of each of our minds, and if we could compare our minds to all of our ancestors, we would discover that the majority of people have mental characteristics that are most similar to our ancestors of perhaps 5000 BC.

We would also discover that none of us are have evolved the mental characteristics that we need for 2024. The human mind needs to evolve a lot more before we are properly adapated to 2024, but by the time humans have evolved for 2024, it will be 3267 or 5015, and our societies will be even more complex.

Our mind evolved to deal with such simple problems as hunger, cold weather, predators, and feeding children. We do not have the emotional desire and/or the intelligence to deal with the complex problems that we have today, such as voting, abortion, money, school, laws, alcohol, organized religions, Zionism, sugar, pets, television, and guns.

Or mine did not evolve to deal with crime networks, or to watch for the modern tricks that criminals use to deceive us, such as Wolves in Sheep's Clothing, Pied Pipers, Gaslighting, Strawman, and Contaminating the Punch Bowl.

The sexual desires of men evolved for an environment in which the women are frequently naked and have hair on their body. We did not evolve to deal with women who wear beautiful clothing, and who have bathrooms to keep themselves clean and shave their body hair to make themselves artificially attractive. We also did not evolve for a social environment in which businesses are using sexual titillation to manipulate us.

Our body has not yet adapted to this modern era, either. For example, our body was not designed to sit for hours in a chair at a computer or in a airplane, or to deal with large amounts of sugar, grains, or animal milk.

Some people have a body that is better adapted to our modern era, but nobody has a body that is completely adapted to it.

We need to study our bodies, and the differences between men and women, different ages, and different races. We can then use that information to alter our culture to keep us in good health, and to make decisions on who should reproduce.

All us believe that we are experts on nutrition, raising children, Donald Trump, abortion, and most other issues, but our confidence does not come from successfully dealing with those issues. Rather, it is the result of inheriting the emotional characteristics of an animal; specifically, their extreme arrogance.

Science did not become productive until people came to the realization that they must be critical of their brilliant ideas, and they must verify one another's ideas. They discovered that what "makes sense" to a human mind is not necessarily realistic.

Modern scientists are very critical of their ideas about chemistry, engineering, and other technical fields, but the human race has not yet figured out that this concept also applies to voting, recreational activities, holiday celebrations, meals, raising children, abortion, drugs, crime, marriage, and other social issues.

Every person still has the primitive attitude that something that "makes sense" is correct. Nobody believes that they need to find supporting evidence for their brilliant opinions, or that they need other people to verify the accuracy of their opinions.

As a result of this arrogant attitude, most people frequently give lectures, or get into arguments, about who to elect as president, how to raise children, and what our policy should be about crime, marijuana, immigration, feminism, and abortion.

One of the other reasons that science became productive a few centuries ago is because scientists realized that they must identify the sources of their information. They realized that they were building on the work of other people, rather than creating new knowledge, and they must identify that other information so that other scientists can understand what they are basing their theories on. However, this is another concept that has not yet been applied to social issues.

Every person creates opinions about social issues by processing the information that he picked up during his life. A person's opinion about crime, Zionism, marijuana, and gambling is the result of him processing the information he picked up about those issues. However, it is not natural for us to keep track of who we are getting our information from, or to verify the accuracy of the information.

Children are like sponges that gather information without any concern for where it comes from or what it is. The reason is because they evolved for an environment in which they can trust the adults and the information that they are provided.

We gather bits of other people’s opinions.

As we grow up, we collect bits and pieces of information from other people. We essentially cut out pieces of newspaper articles and create a collage of information.

We assume that we are creating brilliant opinions, but in reality we are creating collages of other people's information.

Furthermore, we don't make much of an effort to verify the information that we choose to put into our collage. Instead, we are concerned only with whether the information "makes sense". This results in us preferring the information that is emotionally pleasing.

We are also likely to believe information that we get from a person we admire or respect, such as the Pope, a Hollywood celebrity, a billionaire, or a Queen. Therefore, the value of our opinions is partly dependent upon our ability to select appropriate role models.

Our knowledge about life is a collage of other people's information, but those other people are also creating collages of other people's information. Therefore, our knowledge is a collage of pieces of other people's collages. And since nobody verifies any of their information, all of our collages are full of mistakes, propaganda, and lies.

All of us are exposed to virtually the same information, but we pick out different pieces for our collage. The value of our collage depends upon our ability to choose information. The the social scientists and religious fanatics, for example, are ignoring a lot of information about evolution, and collecting lots of worthless information.

The Big Bang theory was first proposed in 1927 by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest. All he did was modify some of the religious nonsense that he had picked up from other religious fanatics. Specifically, he removed God from the creationism theory, which resulted in a theory in which the universe creates itself.

That is not an intelligent alternative to creationism. It is just a worthless modification of a nonsensical religious fantasy. The Big Bang Theory doesn't explain the universe any better than the Bible.

Actually, the Bible might have fewer contradictions. For example, the Big Bang theory claims that everything is expanding outward from a single point, while at the same time claiming that galaxies are colliding with each other. Ethan Siegel wrote this article to defend the Big Bang theory, and one of his remarks is that "there's no center point to the event of the Big Bang" because "the Universe didn't explode; it just expanded."

All human languages are still very crude, and Siegel is an example of people who are confused by some of the vague words. Siegel believes that he has clarified the Big Bang theory by replacing the word "explode" with "expand", but that doesn't clarify the theory any better than if he had said that the universe widened, swelled, extended, filled out, distended, dilated, bloated, increased in size, inflated, or enlarged.

No matter which word is chosen, it cannot explain how the universe expanded from a tiny point without that location becoming the center of the expansion. Also, no matter which word is chosen, it cannot explain how the galaxies can collide with one another when they are traveling outward from the center of the Big Bang.

One of the most important activities of our lives is eating food, and this constitution gives the Meals Ministry the authority to control food recipes and meals. Whether we benefit by this depends upon the ability of the voters to select an appropriate Health President, and the ability of the Health President to select a competent Meals Minister. For some examples of how some people would be a terrible Meals Minister:

•	This woman would put pee into our food.
•	A fanatical vegan would prohibit meat, or force us to eat insects.
•	A person who refuses to believe that we are apes would design meals with no regard to the genetic characteristics of a human body. Instead, he will be more interested in making the meals pleasurable.

If we can provide ourselves with a Meals Minister who is a zoologist that specializes in humans, then he would realize that humans evolved to eat certain foods, and that each of us has different reactions and allergies to foods. He would experiment with meals that are designed to fit our genetic characteristics, and he would be willing to investigate the possibility that men and women, and different ages and races, need slightly different meals. He would provide us with meals that are healthier than what we would get from the religious fanatics, Freudian psychologists, and other anti-evolutionary people. We would benefit from his guidance.

Giving people the freedom to choose their own meals is idiotic because most of us have never done any research into nutrition. Furthermore, the people who have done research into health are just blind men feeling an elephant, so their decisions are only slightly less idiotic than ours.

Letting people choose their own meals is as idiotic as letting people choose their own medicines. Although scientists and doctors still do not know much about medicines, they can make better decisions about medicines than the rest of us, so we benefit from their advice.

Furthermore, scientists will make much better decisions about medicines and foods when we restrict them to people who have an above-average understanding that humans are a species of ape, and when they are free of the pressure from businesses, Zionists, religious fanatics, and psychologists to promote a particular medicine or food.

Scientists and doctors will also make better decisions about medicines and foods when we maintain a People database that contains details about everybody's health because that database will allow them to get a better understanding of the human mind and body.

The people who are not critical of their collage of information can easily become victims of the propaganda, lies, and deception of crime networks, advertisements, salesmen, pedophiles, and Zionists.

For example, in 1972 Arm & Hammer began advertising baking soda as a way of removing odors from refrigerators, and within a year more than half of the American refrigerators had a box of baking soda in it.

However, Arm & Hammer never provided scientific evidence that the technique works. It might be just another advertising trick to exploit us, similar to the advertising slogan that "Diamonds are a Girl's Best Friend", and the advertisements for Crisco.

We must be critical of the information that we pick up from other people, and we cannot believe something simply because it "makes sense".

We must also be careful of trusting "experts" because nobody is truly an expert on anything. There are simply some people who are less ignorant than the majority.

We need to be critical of the information that we pick up, but in this modern era, we muar pick up too much information for any of us to analyze by ourselves. We have to pick up so much information that children must spend most of their childhood in school. There is no way anybody can verify all of the information that he picks up during his life. We need a government agency to analyze information for us.

To complicate the issue of determining which information is accurate, we have to be aware that some of the information is coming from people who are deliberately trying to deceive us.

People who cannot look critically at their opinions will not realize that they are being treated as puppets by businesses, religions, and other people.

For example, everybody who is concerned with how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll POP are victims of deception.

Another example are the people who believe they know how to eat an Oreo cookie.

Most people are not concerned about Tootsie POPs or Oreo cookies, but those are just two simple examples of the manipulation that occurs in a free enterprise system and a democracy.

In a free enterprise system, businesses treat us as profit opportunities, and it is likely that all of us have been deceived by businesses at least once in our life.

Furthermore, it is likely that all of us have also been a victim of some Jewish group, religion, sports group, charity, think tank, or other organization or person. For example, many people have been deceived into believing Anne Frank's Diary, the Apollo moon landings, that the United Nations created Israel, or that World War I was a "Great War".

Schools are also deceiving us because they are in competition for students, rather than competing to prepare students for life. For example, many colleges have fooled some of their students into believing that they are special people for going to the "best" college. This results in graduates from Harvard who believe that they are better people than those who graduated from Yale, Cambridge, or Oxford.

Schools deceive students into believing that they are special people.

The people who boast about their college are puppets or victims, just like the people who boast about knowing how to eat an Oreo cookie.

Likewise, the people who believe that lobster, caviar, and certain other foods are "delicacies" are victims of deception, and so are the people who believe that they are having a better life than everybody else because they can afford a Rolls-Royce or goldplated cell phone.

When we are not critical of the information that we pick up, we can become manipulated by criminals, businesses, charities, religions, idiots, lunatics, and ignorant people.

Furthermore, we become a nuisance if we lecture other people about what they should think. It is even more detrimental when people get into fights and arguments over the irrational, deceptive, and idiotic information that they picked up.

People have been fighting and arguing about religion for centuries, and today we fight over issues that didn't exist until recently, such as abortion, immigration, the eating of meat, the pronouns of our language. What is the difference between people getting into an argument about:

• The correct religion. • The correct policy for abortion. • The correct way to eat an Oreo cookie. • The correct way to make pizza. • The best recreational activity. • The best college.

There is no significant difference between people who argue about those issues. All of them are behaving like arrogant animals, and they are wasting a portion of their life on a worthless activity, and they irritate themselves and one another.

YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and other Internet sites allow everybody, including children, to post comments, but only a few people are posting comments that are intelligent and informative. Many comments are from people who believe that they are experts on something.

As a result, they post comments that are worthless, insulting, or sarcastic. They are wasting a portion of their life, and when they get into arguments, they can cause themselves frustration and anger. They are victims of their arrogance. They would have a better life if they could control their arrogance and find something more pleasant and productive to do with their leisure time. That would also make the message boards more useful by eliminating a lot of the worthless comments.