—“Juridical equality is satisfied in a jury of our peers (holding sympathetic interests): this real-property/life-property bias is acceptable and necessary.”—William L. Benge
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 11:33:00 UTC
Form: Quote Commentary
-
IVAR DIEDERIK HITS THE TRANSCENDENT NAIL ON THE HEAD….. —“I’ve seen people a
IVAR DIEDERIK HITS THE TRANSCENDENT NAIL ON THE HEAD…..
—“I’ve seen people accuse Curt of denying the transcendent. But even the mystics themselves have all said the same thing: the transcendent can’t be expressed in words. The greatest mystics are silent about it. Because that which is beyond the grasp of words, should not be put into words. Do not try to testify what can’t be testified.
Curt’s methodology is about the realm of spoken words. It doesn’t make any claims about the unspeakable. If you want to have transcendental, psychedelic and religious experiences, have them. Just don’t say anything about them that is false. Because otherwise Curt is going to swing his hammer of testimonialism at you.”—- Ivar Diederik
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 11:27:00 UTC
-
was involved early on with the main players and my experience with them was (a)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#53e0d3204c7chttps://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#53e0d3204c7cI was involved early on with the main players and my experience with them was (a) a pack of money seeking bureaucratic parasites, (b) a bunch of well meaning political fools (c) a set of scientists of extremely questionable ethics providing malincentives to a+b. Personally my company lost 2M via the Clinton foundation, and I lost about 200k, in November of 09 when it came out that the data had been ‘creatively manipulated’ and ‘counter evidence’ had been actively suppressed. I try not to do business with the government, but it was at MSFT’s request, so we did it. And while I gotta say the POLITICIANS were good well intentioned people, the bureaucracy was fucking corrupt as hell, the two major ‘private’ agencies were corrupt as hell, and the scientists were profit seeking bullshitters. And the left and the public are sheep.
(Pointing out that, according to a friend, this is a survey of people in the oil industry in Alberta. But every chance I have to discredit the activist community I’m taking…)
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 09:24:00 UTC
-
was involved early on with the main players and my experience with them was (a)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#53e0d3204c7cI was involved early on with the main players and my experience with them was (a) a pack of money seeking bureaucratic parasites, (b) a bunch of well meaning political fools (c) a set of scientists of extremely questionable ethics providing malincentives to a+b. Personally my company lost 2M via the Clinton foundation, and I lost about 200k, in November of 09 when it came out that the data had been ‘creatively manipulated’ and ‘counter evidence’ had been actively suppressed. I try not to do business with the government, but it was at MSFT’s request, so we did it. And while I gotta say the POLITICIANS were good well intentioned people, the bureaucracy was fucking corrupt as hell, the two major ‘private’ agencies were corrupt as hell, and the scientists were profit seeking bullshitters. And the left and the public are sheep.
(Pointing out that, according to a friend, this is a survey of people in the oil industry in Alberta. But every chance I have to discredit the activist community I’m taking…)
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 09:24:00 UTC
-
photos_and_videos/your_posts/34324888_10156399886852264_1418466417551867904_n_10
photos_and_videos/your_posts/34324888_10156399886852264_1418466417551867904_n_10156399886847264.jpg Scott ThroneAgreed. There are only 2 options for the genuinely noble to impose the correct positions.
Words
Warfare
When words absolutely stop being effective. When reason stops swaying people. When basic moral principles cannot be argued for to the masses. When basic reality becomes “hate”. When the unreasonable (that can never be reasoned with) vastly outnumber the reasonable. When you have huge portions of the pupulace demanding for their own enslavement and believing they are noble for doing so.
Words are over. Talking is done. Nothing more needs said.
I totally agree.Jun 03, 2018 11:59amRichard NikoleyThat was intended to expose you, Curt.Jun 03, 2018 2:44pmCurt DoolittleYou can’t be doxxed if you’re shouting from a mountaintop. You can only be promoted.Jun 03, 2018 3:12pmNeil A. Bucklewnever counter signal what must be done.Jun 03, 2018 3:16pmRichard NikoleyEveryone can easily find my home address. I even give it out to pussy boys now and then right in comments, to shut their pussy boy mouths.Jun 03, 2018 3:49pmHoward Van Der KlauwCan the war be accomplished through law or has that horse bolted?Jun 03, 2018 4:37pmScott ThroneWe are about to find out in Europe. More and more nationalists and right-wingers/anti-immigration parties and candidates are winning.
I hope for a legalistic solution.
I doubt one however.Jun 03, 2018 4:40pmHoward Van Der KlauwScott law is de facto violence. The law pendulum has swung a long way towards permissiveness and away from retribution. It will be interesting to see whether the pendulum swings back (with or without a bit of a push). Me Too for instance can potentially swing law in one of two directions. There are now calls to relax defamation laws so that people can make public unsubstantiated allegations without repercussions. Some people also want a relaxation in standards of evidence when there is only two conflicted testimonies available.Jun 03, 2018 4:45pmScott ThroneI know. Legalistic Warfare by the proxy of the State is still warfare. It’s still violent and still potentially deadly.
I do not however, see a legalistic solution without wide spread civil war. The “forces” are too entrenched.
It won’t be settled in a court or at a Senate.
It will be settled on the street and in the field.
I hope the West is not too far gone to solve this without barbarism and brutality. I just doubt it to be true.Jun 03, 2018 4:57pmRadu M Oleniuc”And when we thought Liberty simply and solely can create civilization, we were bitterly wrong, because civilization creates liberty, and not the other way around” – P.P. Carp, a Romanian Conservative, in 1879.
”Și când noi am gândit că libertatea pur și simplu poate crea civilizațiunea, ne-am înșelat amar, căci civilizațiunea creează libertatea, iar nu libertatea civilizațiunea.” (P.P Carp, 1879)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=920393444638483&set=a.156953574315811.35814.100000035095938&type=3&theaterJun 03, 2018 7:51pmScott ThroneLiberty is the prize.
Not the strategy.
This is why Libertarianism is insufficient,Jun 03, 2018 7:53pmGenevieve HarrisPhilip i think this is the one i was talking aboutJun 03, 2018 8:40pm
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 09:08:00 UTC
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/34324888_10156399886852264_14184664
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/34324888_10156399886852264_1418466417551867904_n_10156399886847264.jpg Dmitry NikolovJun 03, 2018 9:25amScott ThroneAgreed. There are only 2 options for the genuinely noble to impose the correct positions.
Words
Warfare
When words absolutely stop being effective. When reason stops swaying people. When basic moral principles cannot be argued for to the masses. When basic reality becomes “hate”. When the unreasonable (that can never be reasoned with) vastly outnumber the reasonable. When you have huge portions of the pupulace demanding for their own enslavement and believing they are noble for doing so.
Words are over. Talking is done. Nothing more needs said.
I totally agree.Jun 03, 2018 11:59amRichard NikoleyThat was intended to expose you, Curt.Jun 03, 2018 2:44pmCurt DoolittleYou can’t be doxxed if you’re shouting from a mountaintop. You can only be promoted.Jun 03, 2018 3:12pmNeil A. Bucklewnever counter signal what must be done.Jun 03, 2018 3:16pmRichard NikoleyEveryone can easily find my home address. I even give it out to pussy boys now and then right in comments, to shut their pussy boy mouths.Jun 03, 2018 3:49pmHoward Van Der KlauwCan the war be accomplished through law or has that horse bolted?Jun 03, 2018 4:37pmScott ThroneWe are about to find out in Europe. More and more nationalists and right-wingers/anti-immigration parties and candidates are winning.
I hope for a legalistic solution.
I doubt one however.Jun 03, 2018 4:40pmHoward Van Der Klauw@[100022007057096:2048:Scott] law is de facto violence. The law pendulum has swung a long way towards permissiveness and away from retribution. It will be interesting to see whether the pendulum swings back (with or without a bit of a push). Me Too for instance can potentially swing law in one of two directions. There are now calls to relax defamation laws so that people can make public unsubstantiated allegations without repercussions. Some people also want a relaxation in standards of evidence when there is only two conflicted testimonies available.Jun 03, 2018 4:45pmScott ThroneI know. Legalistic Warfare by the proxy of the State is still warfare. It’s still violent and still potentially deadly.
I do not however, see a legalistic solution without wide spread civil war. The “forces” are too entrenched.
It won’t be settled in a court or at a Senate.
It will be settled on the street and in the field.
I hope the West is not too far gone to solve this without barbarism and brutality. I just doubt it to be true.Jun 03, 2018 4:57pmRadu M Oleniuc”And when we thought Liberty simply and solely can create civilization, we were bitterly wrong, because civilization creates liberty, and not the other way around” – P.P. Carp, a Romanian Conservative, in 1879.
”Și când noi am gândit că libertatea pur și simplu poate crea civilizațiunea, ne-am înșelat amar, căci civilizațiunea creează libertatea, iar nu libertatea civilizațiunea.” (P.P Carp, 1879)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=920393444638483&set=a.156953574315811.35814.100000035095938&type=3&theaterJun 03, 2018 7:51pmScott ThroneLiberty is the prize.
Not the strategy.
This is why Libertarianism is insufficient,Jun 03, 2018 7:53pmGenevieve Harris@[100003168052955:2048:Philip] i think this is the one i was talking aboutJun 03, 2018 8:40pm
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 09:08:00 UTC
-
Untitled
http://nypost.com/2017/01/14/its-time-to-face-facts-obamas-presidency-was-a-failure/http://nypost.com/2017/01/14/its-time-to-face-facts-obamas-presidency-was-a-failure/
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 06:01:00 UTC
-
Untitled
http://nypost.com/2017/01/14/its-time-to-face-facts-obamas-presidency-was-a-failure/
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 06:01:00 UTC
-
And then I saw your post….
–“Holy crap, i was practicing a speech about the evolution of christianity and talking about Aquinas’s attempts to reconcile the Aristotle’s empirical views with christianity. That aquinas didn’t want christianity to follow the path of the muslims in banning any form of empirical logic, but at the same time kept knowledge of God through the bible as paramount. And in my speech I jump to Francis Bacon as being the one to refine the empirical method as a seed of the scientific method that we have today. Bacon, while relying on Aristotle’s empiricism simultaneously despised the flaws in how Aristotle carried them out, felt it was too discursive. Bacon simplified the method to focus on observations and systematically describing the object while being careful to avoid generalizing in the inductive reasoning process of what the observed facts can demonstrate. And then I saw your post…..”— A Friend I think anyone who knows the of the development of scientific thought knows this. It’s cannon. I think we’d say it’s Roger Bacon > { Newton + Francis Bacon + Galileo + Descartes} > … And while we find arguments to the influence of Francis Bacon, and Descartes, they are minor compared to Newton and Galileo. They were all relative contemporaries. Bacon and Galileo corresponded. But it was Galileo that gave us science finally, and he and Descartes led the battle against the church on behalf of Copernicus.
-
And then I saw your post….
–“Holy crap, i was practicing a speech about the evolution of christianity and talking about Aquinas’s attempts to reconcile the Aristotle’s empirical views with christianity. That aquinas didn’t want christianity to follow the path of the muslims in banning any form of empirical logic, but at the same time kept knowledge of God through the bible as paramount. And in my speech I jump to Francis Bacon as being the one to refine the empirical method as a seed of the scientific method that we have today. Bacon, while relying on Aristotle’s empiricism simultaneously despised the flaws in how Aristotle carried them out, felt it was too discursive. Bacon simplified the method to focus on observations and systematically describing the object while being careful to avoid generalizing in the inductive reasoning process of what the observed facts can demonstrate. And then I saw your post…..”— A Friend I think anyone who knows the of the development of scientific thought knows this. It’s cannon. I think we’d say it’s Roger Bacon > { Newton + Francis Bacon + Galileo + Descartes} > … And while we find arguments to the influence of Francis Bacon, and Descartes, they are minor compared to Newton and Galileo. They were all relative contemporaries. Bacon and Galileo corresponded. But it was Galileo that gave us science finally, and he and Descartes led the battle against the church on behalf of Copernicus.