EzraS wrote:
@Your_Boy where did you come up with all this? I have seen a lot of what you have said before, so I am wondering where you found it. Although I know it's obviously out on the internet and I can probably pin it down just by searching 'autism next step in evolution'.
Basically from my experience there are two types of autistics when it comes to this.
Those who were diagnosed with significant classic autism at an early age via extensive testing and evaluation that continued periodically throughout their childhood.
And those who were diagnosed with mild autism at a later age via minimal testing and evaluation.
So far from what I have seen, those who have presented pretty much the same definition of autism as you have, fit the latter description.
They write off most or all of the disorders of significant classic autism as being; a mutation or glitch. Due to comorbids. As being psychosomatic. As a result of socio-environmental conditioning.
So what's left to qualify as a next step in evolution 2.0 autistic, is someone who has minimal autism that was diagnosed via minimal testing and evaluation (or is self diagnosed) who spends a lot of time on the internet reading stuff written by others with mild/minimal autism who believe they are a super-person, an indigo child and so on.
A variety of sources. I've always loved reading. I have been gatherring all of this research since I was young. I read books from the library, read arcticles & reports on the Internet, watched scientific shows, used anecdotal evidence, observed evidence in other people, etc. I have amassed literally decades worth of random information in My mind. Using My knowledge, memory, pattern-detection skill & intelligence, I have connected dots together to explain any question or problem I have ever had. I do not seek out biased research unless lt is absolutely necessary (rare), so the idea of other autists talking about this next step in evolution is very new to Me. I have never seen any catch-all explanation of any of the points I've made. This all requires combining knowledge, something that NT scientists seem to have trouble with. For example, anyone in a medical profession knows that one cannot be born with a disorder & everyone knows that people are born autistic, yet they still make the faux claim that autism is a disorder.
When people are biased, they tend to assume something is true based on emotions & then try to rationalize lt with evidence. This never works though, because the foundation isn't solid. I may have some bias due to being autistic, but I never sought to disprove lt being a disorder just so I could not have a disorder. Otherwise, I would also try to disprove ADD, ADHD & Tourette's Syndrome as being disorders. I know I have disorders, but autism is not among them. In reality, I noticed inconsistencies in the commonly held belief that autism is a disorder. That is the logical basis that motivated Me to do more research to see why there are discrepancies. All of the research I have done has consistently & flawlessly pointed to autism not being a disorder or disability. If autism were a disorder, this wouldn't be possible. Take the Flat Earth Theory for example. Flat Earthers provide comparable pseudoscientific evidence to support their views. But since the planet is actually a globe, Globe Earthers have consistently disproved ALL of their evidence while providing uncontestable evidence that the planet is indeed more or less spherical.
In the Flat Earthers' minds, they are correct. Why is that? Because they came to an EMOTIONAL conclusion in their minds that the planet is flat & then used RATIONAL evidence to support that view. When evidence didn't fit well enough for them, they cast lt off as being wrong, so that they could still be right. The remaining evidence is only correct lf you ignore certain aspects of reality. They literally have to break physics just to be right. In other words, they are wrong but determined to be right. Poor foundation = poor theory. Globe Earthers used RATIONAL evidence to come to the RATIONAL conclusion that the planet is a sphere. Strong foundation = strong theory.
It is the exact same thing with autism. Neurotypicals came to the EMOTIONAL conclusion that autists, due to being unorthodox, must be disorderly & disabled, then used RATIONAL evidence to prove lt. When evidence doesn't fit, lt is conveniently ignored. Autists use RATIONAL evidence to come to the RATIONAL conclusion that they do not have a disorder or disability. Imagine lf I emotionally decided that there is no such thing as a wall. Now instead of letting the evidence come to Me, I'm forced to seek lt out. I might say that each language has a different word for wall & that the old English word isn't wall. Seems legit. Only one problem. It's still a wall. Sometimes lt seems like the circle block will fit through the square slot, but lt never will. An unbiased foundation is critical to any research.
The Flat Earth Versus Globe Earth Debate is a pretty good example of how unbiased My research is. For a long time, I wasn't sure which to believe. I looked at debates, examined arguments on both sides, asked questions unlikely to result in biased answers, etc. I found misinformation on both sides, which made lt difficult. Finally, I decided that there is one easy way to find out who is right once & for all: find footage of a plane flying over Antarctica. So I did. As lt turns out, an airline called Quanta regularly makes flights over Antarctica, which not only disproves the notion that lt cannot be done, but also proves that there is no ice wall, only more water. Therefore, the planet is clearly a globe.
I'm confused about this age model you're supporting. I get why you would say testing matters, but lf a teenager undergoes frequent testing into adulthood, is that teenager's autism somehow questionable? I match almost all of the criteria for being autistic, so I'm not sure why this is still being questioned. The only things remotely neurotypical about Me are certain pesky stigmas that are so strong, I haven't been able to shake them off entirely. There are a couple of other things, but they are debatable. Less than 5% of My character is even debatably neurotypical. Even lf I were 3% neurotypical, I'd still be 97% autistic. Anyway, autisarians clearly have a reason to feel superior, so they're obviously not neurotypical, since NT's do not make such claims nor possess such stats.
11 is hardly a late age & I was not diagnosed with mild autism, as I am not mildly autistic.
That is correct. Autism is incorrectly seen as a disorder due to either psychosomatic comorbidities, coincidental neurological deformation or both. Introducing the Fallacy Of Composition. Tires are made of rubber. Cars have tires. Therefore, cars are made of rubber. Right? Wrong. Cars are primarily made of metal. ADD, ADHD, Tourette's Syndrome & neurological deformation are disabilities. Autists tend to have or seemingly tend to have these disabilities as comorbidities. Therefore, autism is a disability. Right? Wrong. Comorbidities are not symptoms.
The parts do not necessarily define the whole. Otherwise, people in wheelchairs would be cyborgs. When NT scientists start isolating autism from lts comorbidities, the common sense reality that autisarians have been trying to convince them of will become clear: lt is a diverse state of mind, no different from neurotypicals than males are from females, gays are from straights or whites are from blacks. Is blackism a disorder? Some black people coincidentally have neurological deformities. Most black people suffer from comorbidities, due to societal stigma against their ethnicity. Therefore, black people are disabled. Let's take away their rights, perform horrific experiments & eugenics on them, treat them as dirt & avoid them at all costs. Fallacy Of Composition, making neurotypical scientists MORE SAMRTER since the advent of science. Oh no, I bought a game that doesn't work. I guess that means all games are broken. Let's destroy all games & only watch movies. Come on, guys, don't fall for this silly propaganda.
The sociopaths who rule you employ these tactics all of the time. And they always work. If autists & neurotypicals are busy fighting one another, there not only won't be a force big enough to stand up to the sociopaths, but also nobody will even see them. Try lt some time. Get two friends to fight about something insignificant, then steal their wallets while they're focused on fighting. They'll assume the other did lt. It's incredibly easy to do. Don't actually do lt though, as that's unethical. But this phenomenon can be observed throughout all of history, going back to Hammurabi in ancient Egypt. All of this history, all of this historical research & noone is learning a thing from lt.
Minimal autism, according to you, who have as of yet provided zero evidence to support your autism scale model. I do not seek out autistic research. All of the evidence I have provided is readily available without having to go to some autistic conspiracy theorist's blog to do so. I won't automatically disrepute such a source, but I won't seek lt out either & won't use lt as evidence except for in the rare event that lt is the only research available.
30 Nov 2019, 5:56 pm
