(dick). lol
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:22:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041976611492318
Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041274615078974
(dick). lol
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:22:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041976611492318
Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041274615078974
You know, we don’t correspond very often but when we do I usually appreciate you. 😉 lol -hugs
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:22:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041924266606784
Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785041631491547294
I’m still nervous. Part of the reason I”m announcing it is to test whether anyone wants to talk me out of it. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:17:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785040625152201201
Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785040497469178277
First volume is the logic of first principles through the law. Second volume is the reformation of the law constitution and policies. After that there are six more volumes and we’ll release them in whatever order is helpful. I suspect ‘The Prosecution and Judgement’ will be third…
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:16:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785040431979376992
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785016853422879136
BTW: I agree with everything you’ve said. The difference is that I’m starting with first causes in neurology to explain differences, and you’re working from the evolutionary pressures to develop those neurological differences. This is similar to the video I posted yesterday that explained the difference between Rudyard’s, Jones’ and my explanations, despite agreeing, we act from different trifunctional biases given our experiences and knowledge accumulated in life.
I think “the science and the method and the first principles” readily illustrate that when these points of view are coherent with one another and as such compatible, it’s evidence that all the compatible and coherent POV’s are correct.
It takes a village of intellectuals so to speak. 😉
Hugs
Reply addressees: @LukeWeinhagen
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:13:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785039791358128129
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785030389066596678
You’ve never seen any of my wives, have you 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:07:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785038235200041051
Reply addressees: @KarenBrown67472
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785037129799655830
As far as I know, I said that they do pulse (all or nothing) like transistors but that they vary in frequency, which is the substitute for amplitude and change across time.
Depending upon whether you interpret my use of transistors as an analogy (switch) to neurons in their function in the brain or more rigorously as a thing that changes and retains state rather than, as neurons, changes and returns to state – then you might be correct or not. I’m willing to believe you were attempting to add clarity more so than disagree. But your subsequent appeal to the quantum caused me to equate the two claims rendering both false. Instead of the possibility that you were correct regarding the exactness of the similarity between neurons (on-of) vs transistors (on-or-off). Producing this effect requires additional electronic components, usually Flip-Flops or PLC’s.
Neurons communicate primarily through release of action potentials, which are indeed “all-or-nothing” pulses. When a neuron fires an action potential (usually called a spike), it momentarily reverses the electric potential across its cell membrane, which then rapidly returns to its resting state.
This process is similar to an electrical pulse and is indeed all-or-nothing—either the neuron reaches the threshold to trigger an action potential, or it does not.
Next, neurons use what we call “rate coding” where the information is not carried in the amplitude of the action potential (since all action potentials are roughly the same size and shape in a given neuron) but rather in the frequency and timing of these spikes:
… Frequency: A higher rate of firing (more action potentials over a given time period) can indicate stronger intensity or a different type of stimulus. For example, a sensory neuron might fire more rapidly in response to a brighter light or a louder sound.
And;
… Timing: The timing of action potentials can also be crucial, especially in neural circuits where precise timing between the firing of multiple neurons encodes information.
Therefore, my statement that neurons “vary in frequency, which is the substitute for amplitude and change across time” is correct in the context of how information is processed and conveyed by neural action potentials.
Neurons modulate the rate and pattern of these pulses to represent various types of sensory input, motor commands, and other information within the nervous system.
This method of communication differs from how devices like transistors function, as transistors modulate amplitude or turn on/off as switches without an intrinsic “all-or-nothing” pulse similar to action potentials.
Cheers 😉
Reply addressees: @MatthewParrott
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 20:07:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785038107726811139
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785034037091782759
IS IT TIME TO PUBLISH THE BIG TABOO?
I produced a huge volume of material before I became seriously ill. And of course, now that most of my health and as a consequence most of my brain is working again, I’m able to do more than one thing at a time.
So in looking through the scripts and videos I have partly completed in order to finish the ‘foundations’ series, which is largely to explain how the body produces consciousness, and probably necessary to augment our first book (volume), I came across a few other presentations and scripts from my ‘Taboo’ Series that I didn’t record and publish due to the ‘Purge’ that occurred (as I’d predicted it would) once Trump was ‘unelected’, and the January 6 catastrophe gave license to the state to crack down both directly and through it’s army of left wing proxies.
Anyway, one of these Taboo Series scripts and slides is:
—“The Taboos Series – The Feminine Seduction of Abrahamism”–
Which is, aside from sex differences, civilization, and race differences that the majority of you folks appear to care about, is probably the one topic that will most inform, educate, horrify, and agitate you to new levels.
I didn’t realize I’d taken my notes and writings and put this presentation together as a ‘class’ as I did in the Method series. But I did. And it’s … a devastating bit of linguistic science so to speak.
So I’ve been writing most of the day and am a bit tired at the moment, but I think I might record that video just to run the experiment. At the very least it will be entertaining. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 19:53:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785034652207521792
RT @curtdoolittle: @Womenrising2023 @MizzFuzzBall @NoahRevoy Ladies. Context: Most of us who work together have wives, are in good relation…
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 17:29:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784998361524773360
Ladies. Context: Most of us who work together have wives, are in good relationships, and are successful in life. We are struggling with the crisis of our age. And we understand that the sequential introduction of the middle class, the working classes, women, and now third world alien populations, have cause integration and adaptation struggles for the past. This matters because class roughly corresponds to capacity to bear responsibility for mind, self, family, private and common at increasing scales. Adding the ‘women’ class was a shock because women do not seek to produce independence, produce competitive excellence, demonstrate economic and political responsibiilty, and most importantly favor capitalizaion in pursuit of status but instead CONSUMPTION and evasion of responsiblity (again consumption) because the sex differences in the brains are reducible to male systematizing predator-response capitalization and responsibility for it vs female empathizing prey-response and hyperconsumption, and absence of responsibility for it.
Every single thing a feminine mind disagrees with a male mind over – other than willgness to have sex – consists of the evasion of responsibility while seeking hyperconsumption at others’ (usually men’s) expense.
There are no cases where this isn’t true.
And that’s the most disturbing bit of science I’ve ever come across in my life.
SO – the men in our group are trying to find a method of (a) ending the illusion of female victimhood and innocence (b) equally outlawing female antisocial behavior as we have male (c) causing female self regulation of parasitism and driving the sexes to reconcilliation in politics.
Why? We are just doing the hard work of integrating another class into society, economy, and polity while constraining animal instincts to the direction of capitalzation for use in the commons.
Reply addressees: @Womenrising2023 @MizzFuzzBall @NoahRevoy
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-29 17:29:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784998348568543232
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784994928306659792