D4rkyFirefly: "By the human manipulation, i meant as miss guided planned simulation towards the one who expects no intromisión by anyone who knows its...

D4rkyFirefly: "By the human manipulation, i meant as miss guided planned simulation towards the one who expects no intromisión by anyone who knows its ins and outs. And by what QChing said above, is what I meant “receptiveness/receptivity”. In order for a human to receptive the so called “deviation message” aka the Already Planned Response system (due to no matter what outcome you get, its considered to be “receptive “ by the human, cos it will have something related or relevant to him regarding its life cycle and events.) But in order to know and understand if the process of something was done/generated “randomly” you gotta have a control over the process, but again, what process? If there is no process, but intelligently crafted randomness to be subconsciously receptively self-forced, right? ;)"

Feels like the guy is just accusing us of tampering with randomness

D4rkyFirefly: "Yeah, cos no matter what you throw him, it will always have another angle to the same question just differently exposed answers but same POV, most of the time reaching coherent limits to its own understandings, those so called the systematically looped deviations results, that touch the coherence boundary making ourselves more vulnerable into the forced acceptability criteria. Just my two cents :)"