Total posts: 3,474
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
its gone way beyond interpretation of observations to become a tower of abstraction that is completely detached from the reality it was meant to interpret.Why do you think that?
Because
we have confused the tools of science with the substance of science.
That the universe is expanding is observation.
No, Redshift
is the observation, “that the universe is expanding” is one possible interpretation of that observation.
The way space acts, is geometrically curved. The mathematics of curved and expanding space is a description of what reality is actually doing - so in this respect it is actually very specifically tied to reality.
Reality
is not actually doing Geometry, the geometry of Einstein’s model is only an
abstract representation of reality, it’s
map, not territory.
As well as being a description that best matches the observations we see and offers a descriptive model that correctly predicts a multitude of other observations.
My point is that the so called “facts”
of science have become conceptually inconsistent. What you say here applies equally to our two
best scientific models, Quantum Physics and Relativity Theory. We have our
quantum physics and we think it explains matter and energy, the so-called
standard model, which consists of the electroweak theory (QED) and the theory
of the strong force (QCD) sitting side by side, only partially connected. And
way over there on the other side of the room is the theory of gravity: Einstein’s
general theory of relativity, a theory that bears no resemblance whatsoever to
the standard model and it is pretty clear that they will never be reconciled
because their basic presuppositions about the very ontology of existence. To say that they are “what reality is doing”,
is to say that reality is both discrete and continuous, deterministic and probabilistic,
space and time are both stable and dynamic, even within one theory reality
demonstrates the mutually exclusive characteristics of both particles and waves.
It is easy to get carried away, taking our symbols for reality instead of as mere tools of description. Are we uncovering a preexisting order, converging on the way the universe really is, or is it all just a human construction, just a fitting of the data into a carefully crafted mental framework? When are we doing physics? When are we just conjuring with numbers?It is becoming harder and harder to tell how much of the order is truly woven into the world and how much is imposed by the brain’s hunger for pattern. We build these systems to represent the world, and then we are left to wonder what they mean.Physics is particularly complex because the most predictive, most accurate models of reality that we have accurately match what we see - have no intuitive corresponding analogy in our daily lives.The reason for the complexity and the difficulty you see is not with the maths, or the equations, those equation can accurately predict events we see to very high margins of accuracy, and have predicted really strange and bizarre behaviour that have no business being true otherwise.
If truth
is correspondence with reality, implicit in the term truth then, is a need for
representation, truth is a matter of how we choose to represent reality to
ourselves. The maths are abstractions,
they are not the reality.
Robert Frost likened scientific knowledge to a clearing in a forest, the greater the clearing the more contact we have with the unknown, it seems the more information we obtain through natural explanations, rather than less, the mystery of true reality becomes greater.
Robert Frost likened scientific knowledge to a clearing in a forest, the greater the clearing the more contact we have with the unknown, it seems the more information we obtain through natural explanations, rather than less, the mystery of true reality becomes greater.
The issue is not the maths; it’s our tiny ape like brain that evolved to hit things with sticks, and to observe and survive in a very limited portion of the universes 4 primary dimensions - the universe doesn’t make sense to us on an intuitive level; and that makes it hard to really appreciate what relativity means, or what paulis exclusion principle is, and how it creates electron degeneracy pressure. But those things are both observable, measurable and conform to the predictable models of our world that we have - whether their implications are intuitive or not.
That is
my point, and it’s why we can’t confuse the tools of science with the subject
of science, the map with the territory. We have no compelling grounds for regarding
current theories as being anything more than a form of approximation to actual
physical reality.
The last century brought the very nature of reasoning, deductive logic, and rational thinking into question; it was shown that the presumption that deductive logic, reasoning, and rational thinking directly correspond to the truth about physical reality does not hold in all instances.
The last century brought the very nature of reasoning, deductive logic, and rational thinking into question; it was shown that the presumption that deductive logic, reasoning, and rational thinking directly correspond to the truth about physical reality does not hold in all instances.
Rather
than recognize that our mathematics and our theories are practical tools that
help us interpret experiments, we decide that
the standard model tells us what matter and energy are, the actual stuff of the
universe is made up of waves of probability, a realm of pure possibility that
goes unrealized until it is “collapsed” by an observer, who apparently conjures
the particle into existence out of a mathematical haze. We can’t ever see these particles directly of
course, they are hypothetical particles acting according to theory, interacting
with other hypothetical particles, whose existence is built on a very long chain
of inferences, but at the end of this series of hypothesized reactions, matter
and energy come into being. We know the
particles exist because they were verified by experiment; and we know the
experiment was designed correctly because it found the particles. But we are
too self-absorbed with our technology to wonder whether perhaps, just maybe, we
are interpreting mathematical theory, instead of nature.
Created:
-->
@Shila
it has absolutely nothing to do with "afterlife" or AXIOLOGY or any other ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questionsApparently, you don't know what epistemological means.If one is an atheist, there is little reason to believe in an afterlife
OK, and that also isn't what epistemological means.
Created:
-->
@Shila
GQM is an organization of Christian, Protestant, evangelical, theologically conservative, and non-denominational. It is church ministry, coming alongside the church to help people find answers to their spiritually related questions.
You really can't comprehend the Copyright policy, the subject here is one sentence, a very sinple sentence:
Copyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.
I get what it is, and they want you to identify the organization as the author when you thier articles.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
If you ascribe to physicalism, why is a physical state conscious? Why (and how) are physical processes accompanied by experience?For the brain to process a stimulus it has to be conscious and tuned in with the five senses. Touch, smell, taste etc.
For there to be an experience, there needs to be an experiencer, consciousness is the conceptual space within which we find the experieence, it's the entity that experiences, no consciousness, no experience, no consciousness, no knowlege.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
My Mom and both sisters are in Sarasota, all of you, hunker down and stay safe.
And if you are in the evacuation zone, do it, don't make first responders risk thier lives because you were stubborn.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Atheism: there is no god, therefore there is no afterlife, therefore nothing you do or think matters at all. There is no moral standpoint, only what you like matters.ATHEISM is simply "not a theist"it has absolutely nothing to do with "afterlife" or AXIOLOGY or any other ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions
Apparently, you don't know what epistemological means.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Copyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.Putting the link would make little difference because the site does not reveal authors names.Why doesn’t GotQuestions.org give the names of the authors of its articles?Their Copyright Poliy is explicit, either provide the link or clearly identify Got Questions Ministries as the author.Why are you arguing it, do you want us to think it's your work?The link explains why GotQuestion.org does not reveal authors names.Now you know why I provided the article but did not reveal the author’s name.
No. That is not why you violated thier copyright policy, the policy says you can reprint it if "Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author". GQM is the author.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
what you call "consciousness" is simply a natural progression of data processingData processing implies program, who or what does the programmiing. Where does this data processing take place.At what point in the "natural progression" does a miracle happen and viola, "consciousness"?does a dragonfly have "consciousness" ?does an eagle have "consciousness" ?what about an ape ?maybe a dog ?does an infant human have "consciousness" ?
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Now, do you think asking questions in some way answers questions?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
How do you define the “hard problem” of consciousness ?If you ascribe to physicalism, why is a physical state conscious? Why (and how) are physical processes accompanied by experience?how can an insect interact with its environment ?
Why wouldn't they?
how can a robot interact with its environment ?
You think robots are conscious beings that are having an
experience? Please explain.
what you call "consciousness" is simply a natural progression of data processing
Data processing implies program, who or what does the programmiing. Where does this data processing take place.
At what point in the "natural progression" does a miracle happen and viola, "consciousness"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
How do you define the “hard problem” of consciousness ?
If you ascribe to physicalism, why is a physical state conscious? Why (and how) are physical processes accompanied by experience?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
How do you explain General Anesthesia?
General anesthesia can
put a person into an unconscious state, so can sleep, how does that relate to
the question of mind being a causal agent?
The very process by which physicalism translates qualitative experiences into measurable quantities that do not themselves exhibit the qualitative constituents of experience, fundamentally changes the subject matter of the investigation such that the resultant account of consciousness is a contradiction in terms.
How do you solve the “hard problem” of consciousness?
The very process by which physicalism translates qualitative experiences into measurable quantities that do not themselves exhibit the qualitative constituents of experience, fundamentally changes the subject matter of the investigation such that the resultant account of consciousness is a contradiction in terms.
How do you solve the “hard problem” of consciousness?
Created:
-->
@Shila
Copyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.Putting the link would make little difference because the site does not reveal authors names.Why doesn’t GotQuestions.org give the names of the authors of its articles?
Their Copyright Poliy is explicit, either provide the link or clearly identify Got Questions Ministries as the author.
Why are you arguing it, do you want us to think it's your work?
Created:
-->
@Shila
-> @ShilaCopyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.Perfectly legitimate source.Perfectly legitimate source when they are clearly identified as the source.So you are confirming my source was legitimate now that you identified it.
It's legitimately a source, but one that has a copyright policy that says you must attribute when you reproduce it.
I use links in posts from time to time, but in putting the link in I'm lso letting you know the source. Maybe it would be best if you put the link in the post, and if you do cut and paste, then let us know where it came from per the source's copyright policy.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Gas used to be 2 dollars a gallon.
Gas used to be a quarter a gallon.
America used to be less diverse.
The Republican party used stand for something.
White Supremacists used to be losers, now they are, well, they are still losers.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
all that matters is the price in novemberAfter November, America can get fucked for another 2 years.
If the Republicans take the House and Senate in November, Americans ARE fucked for the next two years.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Copyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.Perfectly legitimate source.
Perfectly legitimate source when they are clearly identified as the source.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Copyright Policy: Articles may be freely printed and distributed, emailed, or shared online provided they are not sold for profit and Got Questions Ministries is clearly identified as the author.
Created:
-->
@Shila
I would further contend that Monotheism and Polytheism are referential to each other, which would mean that by definition they are one and the same.How can Monotheism and Polytheism by definition be one and the same when they are totally opposites of each other?Monotheism definition, the doctrine or belief that there is only one God.Polytheism definition, the doctrine of or belief in more than one god or in many gods.
By
recognizing that they are “polar opposites”, which is to say much
more than they are opposed or separated, it is to say that they constitute a
whole. They are not mutually exclusive
at all, in fact they are mutually sustaining, reciprocal in their true nature.
Our mind thinks of them as basically separate from each other but in reality
they constitute a whole in the same way that the earth’s poles are the ends of
a single entity. There is a reciprocal, transactional relationship being
described. Polar opposites don’t even exist without each other, they are
contingent upon each other, you just can’t have the one without the other. Polar opposites are like the two sides of a
coin, or the two ends of a stick; they reference two opposing aspects of one
and the same thing.
The Christian Bible says “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11). The Jews were Monotheists and the Greeks were Polytheists, and yet, they were one according to the Christian Bible.
It also says that “the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal” (1 Corinthians 12:7). All people are different, there is diversity of dispositions and cultures, and as the Spirit must speak to the needs of all, it necessarily must spread out in almost endless diversity, and yet, it is one and the same Spirit manifesting in all faiths. It strikes me as unpardonably arrogant to make limiting claims about who the Holy Spirit can move in, or how it can manifest in others. and I see nothing in the Bible to indicate that God is in any way denominationally limited.
When Jesus was asked what was the most important commandment of all, he summarized all of His teachings into “Love God intensely, and love your neighbor as you love yourself” (Mark 12:28-31), and I contend that the only way we can do that is by recognizing our neighbor’s faith is to them, what our faith is to us.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
Could you also expand on what, precisely, you mean when you say "Theologically speaking, there is no excluded middle"?
Let me start by saying my comment about the excluded middle is
not limited to Theism. Your post is basically about ontology, and the law of
the excluded middle is a classical law of thought, and as such, it is
epistemological in nature. Even in the realm of propositional logic and
mathematics, the law of the excluded middle is rejected by the schools of
intuitionism, dialetheism, and fuzzy logic. Gödel challenged the validity of
the excluded middle because it failed with “impredicative definitions”.
Putting aside the subject of Spiritual Reality for a moment, a century of Quantum Physics has brought the very nature of reasoning, deductive logic, and rational thinking into question; it was shown that the presumption that deductive logic, reasoning, and rational thinking directly correspond to the truth about physical reality does not hold in all instances. A century of Quantum physics has furthered a trend that began with the discovery, or invention, depending upon your point of view, of non-Euclidean Geometries. In effect, it brought into question the 2500 year unexamined assumption that deductive reasoning corresponded to Truth, and it challenged the fundamental notion of the laws of non-contradiction and the associated excluded middle. Particle and wave are mutually exclusive characteristics, and yet, our best science tells us that they are complementary aspects of one and the same physical reality.
Regarding Spiritual reality then, you can’t reduce Theism to a sort of argumentative and speculative science in which the classical laws of thought apply. The Theist does not believe in inferred Gods whose existence depends on the strength and validity of the arguments that philosophers devise for proving or disproving their likely existence. Theism does not move in the arena of metaphysical probabilities. It moves in the arena of inwardness, of self-knowledge. Theism expresses a dimension of being which can only be apprehended by a specific form of human sensibility which transcends the four dimensional frame of reference of the classical laws of propositional logic.
Theism and hence Theistic knowledge is based on the idea that there is a way of knowing which transcends specific perceptual frames of reference. What Theism does is attempt to express a fundamental human experience that is spiritual, it is typically described as a "transcendent" experience because it lies prior to and beneath language and concepts. Consequently, all statements about Gods are symbolic. They transcend their literal meaning while pointing to the power and meaning that is discerned and mediated through the symbol. The basis of faith is not inferential reason, it is personal encounter, our ideas of God will, thus, always be provisional and inadequate, they are an attempt to express an experiential reality that lies beneath or prior to language and logical thought.
In the mystical core of all faiths, transcendent Gods are always represented as something that cannot be fully comprehended from a human frame of reference. The devotional experience within Theistic and non-theistic Religions, all have their source in this individual spiritual experience that is common to all people and cannot be expressed directly. Hence, each religion must use the terms of its own cultural and social programming and each therefore emphasizes different aspects of this common spiritual experience that cannot adequately be described with words and symbols. As such, the excluded middle of classical logic simply does not apply.
Putting aside the subject of Spiritual Reality for a moment, a century of Quantum Physics has brought the very nature of reasoning, deductive logic, and rational thinking into question; it was shown that the presumption that deductive logic, reasoning, and rational thinking directly correspond to the truth about physical reality does not hold in all instances. A century of Quantum physics has furthered a trend that began with the discovery, or invention, depending upon your point of view, of non-Euclidean Geometries. In effect, it brought into question the 2500 year unexamined assumption that deductive reasoning corresponded to Truth, and it challenged the fundamental notion of the laws of non-contradiction and the associated excluded middle. Particle and wave are mutually exclusive characteristics, and yet, our best science tells us that they are complementary aspects of one and the same physical reality.
Regarding Spiritual reality then, you can’t reduce Theism to a sort of argumentative and speculative science in which the classical laws of thought apply. The Theist does not believe in inferred Gods whose existence depends on the strength and validity of the arguments that philosophers devise for proving or disproving their likely existence. Theism does not move in the arena of metaphysical probabilities. It moves in the arena of inwardness, of self-knowledge. Theism expresses a dimension of being which can only be apprehended by a specific form of human sensibility which transcends the four dimensional frame of reference of the classical laws of propositional logic.
Theism and hence Theistic knowledge is based on the idea that there is a way of knowing which transcends specific perceptual frames of reference. What Theism does is attempt to express a fundamental human experience that is spiritual, it is typically described as a "transcendent" experience because it lies prior to and beneath language and concepts. Consequently, all statements about Gods are symbolic. They transcend their literal meaning while pointing to the power and meaning that is discerned and mediated through the symbol. The basis of faith is not inferential reason, it is personal encounter, our ideas of God will, thus, always be provisional and inadequate, they are an attempt to express an experiential reality that lies beneath or prior to language and logical thought.
In the mystical core of all faiths, transcendent Gods are always represented as something that cannot be fully comprehended from a human frame of reference. The devotional experience within Theistic and non-theistic Religions, all have their source in this individual spiritual experience that is common to all people and cannot be expressed directly. Hence, each religion must use the terms of its own cultural and social programming and each therefore emphasizes different aspects of this common spiritual experience that cannot adequately be described with words and symbols. As such, the excluded middle of classical logic simply does not apply.
Now, back to the concept of complementarity in Quantum Physics, I would contend that as it relates to Spiritual Reality, that Monotheism and Polytheism are complementary rather than at odds with each other or even compartmentalized as separate disciplines, so there is no excluded middle. I would further contend that Monotheism and Polytheism are referential to each other, which would mean that by definition they are one and the same. They are two complimentary aspects of the same transcendent reality so to speak. Then it is the mutuality of Monotheism and Polytheism that leads to truth. Perhaps that elusive "truth" that we are all looking for, is found in the dance of Monotheism and Polytheism, an interplay wherein the full truth is revealed.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
The "seem" gets dropped once you establish Polycentric Manifolds exist in reality. What is ontologically prior/fundamental must be something that exists, and so if something (Y) seems like it can be derived from X but X does not exist, then it does nothing to indicate how fundamental said thing (Y) is.
Polycentric Manifolds exist as mathematical objects, your analysis is really about the definition of mathematical terms. Athias is right, you are trying to make geometry an analog for Theism, which of course transcends the spatial and temporal.
Furthermore, Monocentric Manifolds and Polycentric Manifolds do not exist purely as spatial things, they can exist within organization structures (as an example).
No they can't, organizational structures can be Monocentric or Polycentric, but they aren't manifolds, and furthermore, your argument is not valid when applied to organizational structure.
It is just easier for people to understand concepts when it is related to them in a more common manner, which tends to be spatial or temporal. That does not mean said concepts are limited to the spatial or temporal, just that it is easier to understand them in said terms.
It's is certainly easier to understand concepts spatially or temporally, but spatial and temporal concepts cannot be understood to apply to Theology.
For one thing, your argument presupposes an excluded middle, and Theologically speaking, there is no excluded middle. I believe this applies to most faiths, a common example is Christianity of course, the concept of the Trinity manifests as both Monotheistic and Polytheistic, Hinduism's thousand Gods are all manifestations of the singular transcendent reality of Brahman.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Anti-whitism is the new popular fad. Even advertisers know the truth about which color has power in America.
Oh poor baby, persecuted because you are white? That's just a white supremacists made up thing, one of your white supremacist slogans. You guys think if you claim you are the one being discriminated against it justifies your racism.
Don't be fooled just because everyone in your trailer park is white, diversity is what this country has always been about, it's here to stay, and you guys can't adapt for the same reason the dinosaurs couldn't adapt, brain the size of a walnut, and like the dinosaurs, you are going to go extinct.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
Ken Paxton, the Trump-backed attorney general, was indicted and arrested on criminal securities-fraud charges that are still pending. He has faced calls for his resignation after several of his top aides claimed he abused his office by helping a wealthy donor. And he has been serving as the state’s top lawyer while under threat of a possible new indictment, as the F.B.I. investigates the abuse-of-office and bribery accusations.And he’s still going to win.Which is quite an indictment of the people who continue to support him. Yourself included apparently.
Back in January 2016 he bragged about how morally and ethically banckrupt his supporters were:
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay?" - Donald Trump
His supporters have shown just how right he was for almost seven years now, I can't tell if it's the corruption or the racism that appeals to them most.
Created:
-->
@Shila
It's hard to keep track of all of Trump's legal entaglements, maybe this will help.Great link.Do you have a link to all the cases Trump lost?
Here's only a few:
The court ordered Trump to close his fraudulent charity
and pay $2 Million For Illegally Using Trump Foundation Funds, $250,000 a piece went to eight different charities,
included the Army Emergency Relief and the Children’s Aid Society, he stole
from financially distressed veterans and poor children in need of nutrition, health, and safety.
He paid $25 million to settle the lawsuit about his fraudulent Trump University.
And of course, Trump lost over 50 lawsuits challenging the election outcome.
Here’s a list of Trumps 4095 lawsuits in just the last 30 years:
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Is it because Trump welcomes their support? Is it because Trump speaks their language and uses racist dog whistles? Is it because they believe Trump is a racist?
All of the above and then some.
"For a number of whites, these monumental social and political trends – including an erosion of whites’ majority status and the election of America’s first black president – have signaled a challenge to the absoluteness of whites’ dominance. These threats, both real and perceived, have … brought to the fore, for many whites, a sense of commonality, attachment, and solidarity with their racial group. They have led a sizeable proportion of whites to believe that their racial group, and the benefits that group enjoys, are endangered. As a result, this racial solidarity now plays a central role in the way many whites orient themselves to the political and social world." - Ashley E. Jardina’s 2019 book, White Identity Politics
"
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
Sure, the original story was Danish or whatever, but mermaids definitionally don't live in Denmark, so they can be whatever ethnicity or mix of ethnicities the creators want.
Actually, in the original Danish story, her skin was green, the Character has been whitewashed and blackwashing, it's green people that should be outraged.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Trump believes he declassified all documents just by thinking about it. So why is something like his Tax Returns which was on his mind for years not declassified?
Did he mentally declassify the documents before or after the FBI planted them.
Created:
Created:
-->
@Avery
No, I mean you saying TWS is a normal conservative and isn't a white suprmacist, that is batshit crazyEthnic nationalism is normal. Wanting your own ethnic space is normal. People of the same ethnic group are genetically closest to you (compared to other ethnic groups), and all people are the world prefer being with people similar to themselves.I've never seen a hit piece on China being too Chinese, or Israel being too Jewish, or Kenya being too African.It's only White people wanting their own ethnic space that it's criticised for being too White, that it's "white supremacist".TWS is on here advocating for White people, calling out double standards against White people, and calling out attacks against White people. This is normal Conservative behavior. Chinese, Israeli and Kenyan Conservatives will do the same.Calling normal Conservative behavior "batsh*t crazy", is batsh*t crazy.
Nope, still wrong, saying racism is normal Conservative behavior is batshit crazy.
Common, yes, normal, no.
Created:
-->
@Avery
Oh, well yeah, I'm being sarcastic too.
I read the news, I see what people say, when it feels like I'm trapped in a Fellini movie, I go with sarcasm.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Avery
The Human mind is single unitary thing, a whole so to speak, and therefore tribalism is too interrelated with other requisite functions to simply be removedHow did you conclude that this is the case?
It's a foundational tenet of Sidewalkerism, once you've been reprogrammed you will understand perfectly.
Created:
-->
@Avery
TWS is a normal Conservative.OK, good start, that's what I'm talking about, batshit crazy stuff like that.Oh so you're one of those people who think normal Conservatives all believe in "batsh*t crazy stuff".A perfectly reasonable position.
No, I mean you saying TWS is a normal conservative and isn't a white suprmacist, that is batshit crazy
Do you ever go outside?
Do you ever read his posts?
Try going to his website.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Avery
It's theoretically possible and desirable that the human brain could be redesigned to remove its tribal elements.
The Human mind is single
unitary thing, a whole so to speak, and therefore tribalism is too interrelated with other requisite functions to simply be removed, a better idea would be to adjust the tribalism function in a way that removes discord and conflict, a sinle cohesive tribalism would fuse the cognitive structures of the
brain into a unified whole and unleash the astounding power of a fully
functioning whole brain focused on just a single collective tribe called Sidewalkerism, that would be the best solution
and don't worry, I will be a benevolent potentate.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Blueanon is more profitable.
Slow start, but hey, add some Antifah, maybe some shadowy cabal of Democratic pedophiles, and you're on a roll.
Created:
-->
@Avery
TWS is a normal Conservative.
OK, good start, that's what I'm talking about, batshit crazy stuff like that.
Created:
Witch hunt, good news, that's all you got, where's the good stuff, Jewish Space Lasers, the NY AGs dad killed Kennedy, c'mon, you're not even trying, the least you can do is lay some "Q" on me.
Created:
It's hard to keep track of all of Trump's legal entaglements, maybe this will help.
Created:
Let the freak show begin, whatcha got, compiracy, deep state, secret democratic society of evil, or....maybe he broke the law, what do you think?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Thanks man, I think schizophrenia explains the nature of the OP, not sure what he thinks we can do and I'd hate to do five hours and still not know.
A lot of conspiracies on these boards and I've already told someone to take thier meds lol, I think maybe he's already dealing with the correct professionals, and if he's not inclined to trust them I see no reason he'd come to trust one of us.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Terran_01
Help. Whistleblower. Gravely injured. Dying. Surrounded. Get this evidence out and save my life. No time. This is the motherload of real conspiracies, and it happens in every corner. You are all fighting the wrong battles and looking in the wrong places. This is not a game, so stop treating it like one. What point is there in fighting corruption, when there are loopholes in every country to grab, silence, torture and kill whistleblowers, witnesses and victims without a warrant, and make anyone who talks to disappear? Here is the proof you need, to justify what you know you need to do. Don't waste it. Please save my life. Hurry.
I read this and still have no idea what it's about, it's unreasonable to ask us to put almost five hours in to find out what the post is even about.
What am I treating like a game, what do I know I need to do? It's a very dramatic post but it doesn't tell me anything except that I need to invest almost 5 hours to even know what it's about. Information please.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
of course I'm going to see it in terms of raceWhen all you have is a hammer, every problem starts looking like a nail.
When an issue directly affects you and your family, you pay attention to it.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You obviously didn't see the movie.That's fine, it helps me identify clueless edgelords and people of culture.
I saw it, loved it, and when he was holding the rabbit he was pure Hitler Youth, you cropped a swastica out of the picture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
How do you know I am not a young kid struggling against a fascist state?
Because if that were the case using a picture of a Hitler Youth would not make sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
I know you “get a pass.” That… is my point! Conservatives know that criticizing an individual who happens to be black is not racist… another aspect of the point I’m making. Every Republican president from Nixon to the present day has been accused repeatedly by the press of being a racist, fyi.
Yeah, I know.
If you tried to tell me the Republican party was racist in 2008, I'd have landed on you with both feet, but in 2009, when I saw how my party reacted to Obama, I was ashamed to be a Republican, and then came Trump and the nature of what was happening became undeniable. What Trump did was show the Republican party that you can win by embracing the white supremacists, and rather than stand tall, they bent over and squealed like a pig, now I am proud to have left the party.
Where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit, and from where I'm sitting, of course I'm going to see it in terms of race, but I really think I'm seeing it the way it is. I know that everyone that supports Trump is not a racist, but I also know that every racist supports Trump, and there is no question in my mind who's driving the movement. I'm sorry if I offend, but not that sorry, since it's intentional, you may not be a racist, but you know who you have allied yourself with, and you should be ashamed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Ah… well, you hurl accusations of racism and white supremacy in a way that would make any progressive glow in admiration. In that case, a rewording is in order: luckily for you, you vote Democrat and the POC you lambaste does not.
Unluckily for you, you are forcing the moderates and the independents to vote democrat.
That, plus my family is mixed race, so I get a pass from POC LOL, my black relatives will tell you the same thing about Walker, saying Walker is a moron isn't racist, its just the fact of the matter. I've got white supremacist relatives too, trust me, I know racism and white supremacists when I see them. You may not really be a moron, but if you try to deny the Trump movement is all about white identity politics, then you are pretending to be a moron.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You realize he won the primary against a bunch of while republicans lul.
Yeah, because Trump owns the primaries, he knows how to make Republicans lose, problem is he doesn't know how to make them win.
If you are counting on the few hundred KKK klansmen to keep him out of the Senate, you might be disappointed.
Nope, the Klan will vote the way Trump tells them to, I'm counting on a few million thinking voters recognizing that Walker simply lacks anything even resembling qualifications to be a Senator.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Again— Luckily for you and your criticism of a POC, you aren’t a conservative, nor is Walker a Democrat…
Except for I am a conservative, it's the Republican party that is no longer conservative, I left the party when George Will left, and for the same reason.
In 2016 they gave me a choice between the last two people on earth I would vote for, so I voted Libertarian. Every Republican I know told me that was really a vote for Hillary, every Democrat said it was really a vote for Trump, it wasn't, it was a vote for the only candidate that didn't make me gag. But since then, as I watched the white supremacists help Trump take over the Republican party, I get what they were saying now, and you can be damn straight I became a straight ticket Democrat, my vote is against this dark force that is the gravest threat to my country ever.
You see, that's the problem with how Trump polarized this country, the Republican party doesn't stand for anything anymore, it's just about hating the opposition, and of course the opposition is all the same, you don't like diversity and you can't see diversity. Your pavlovian response to anybody that isn't with you just assumes that preposterous stereotype Trump painted for you when you stopped thinking and started mindlessly following. He said "Don't believe what you see and hear, believe what I tell you", anybody who swallows that KoolAid is not thinking, and now he tells you what to think and what to say and you say it.
You can't win an election without winning the moderates and the independants, Trump told you we don't exist, in polarization there is no middle, and the more you group us in with the Dems the further away you send us , I'm no lib, I'm George Will and everyone associated with the Lincoln Project, and you need our votes to win.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
For saying that, Walker gets this:“The Racist History Behind Herschel Walker’s “I’m Not That Smart” Debate Comment”
Yeah, I forgot Georgia Republicans wouldn't want an uppity black man to be senator, if they have to have a black senator, their definately gonna go with dumb as a post. Compulsive liar, history of domestic violence, secret children out of wedlock, and multiple personality disorder are just bonuses.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Let's play a game, you strongman Walker and I will strongman Warnok. Just as a fun experiment. You go first!
I don't know that game, what does "strongman" mean?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Now do Walker on the economy.
Sure, regarding the economy:
“My message is, I want to bring the economy down”
“It’s not right to tax the rich” (He made $41 MM last year)
“Inflation hurts women more because they’ve got to buy groceries.”
Oh yeah, and regarding bravery: “My favorite game I used to play, guys, was Russian roulette…Unless you can put this gun to your head, you ain't fearless like me. People used to think I was crazy. I would take a gun, put it to my head, snap it. Wouldn't even think about it.”
Created: