Form: Reply

  • agree entirely

    agree entirely


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 00:18:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798872105519661273

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798870577861517733

  • Pacific Northwest USA

    Pacific Northwest USA


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 00:18:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798872038658174993

    Reply addressees: @patriciamdavis

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798870684535546225

  • The difference is not so much in defending it but plugging the holes in it. Whic

    The difference is not so much in defending it but plugging the holes in it. Which I believe I have done. That is different from ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ because the answer is only 75% correct. Every alternative is worse.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 00:08:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798869660546572591

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798865625462587650

  • Depends on what you mean by catastrophism. If you mean the disturbing regularity

    Depends on what you mean by catastrophism. If you mean the disturbing regularity of great dyings, or the dramatic geological and climatological consequences on life with disturbing regularity, then I mean, that’s pretty hard to disagree with.
    The electric universe is another bit of nonsense even if there is a grain of truth here and there the conclusions drawn from those grains of truth are nonsense.
    There isn’t a lot of mystery left at the large scale for mankind, our evolution, or even the evolution of earth, or the evolution of the solar system.
    That doesn’t mean we know everything, but we aren’t missing the exciting stuff we wish we found. In fact, just the opposite. instead we have a deeper understanding of the psychological wants for those exciting things even though they don’t exist and there is no evidence. 😉

    Reply addressees: @SankohaProjekt


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:50:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798865165670060032

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798863269568114712

  • Correct. 😉

    Correct. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:38:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798862048690155580

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798850230240129513

  • BTW: if I havent said so lately- you’re awsome. -hugs

    BTW: if I havent said so lately- you’re awsome. -hugs.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:32:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798860427398623517

    Reply addressees: @Nefertiiti

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798859941572432370

  • More correctly brad helped me understand how to get through to you two. 😉 You s

    More correctly brad helped me understand how to get through to you two. 😉
    You see, I see the world as incentives. And I ignore what people say as nothing more than misdirecting, obscuring, excusing or advocating their incentives.
    For some reason it’s extremely difficult to get across the complexity of influences that produce such things as the world wars and the solutions proposed after them. So in my view you attribute too much to the negative influences that brought about the condition and I attribute too much to the positive ambitions as a consequence of of the wars. So if you want to draw attention to the bad actors – especially the financial sector and ‘the enemy’s stated goal of ending the monarchies’, I have no problem with that. On the other hand you’d need to recognize that there were moral men with moral ambitions that precisely because they were anglo-scotts-dutch-german protestant moralists, believe they were doing the best thing for mankind – and they were and it worked. If they had other ambitions Patton could have destroyed russia and macarthur china and we would have an even better world fully transformed out of the age of empires.
    That they were duped into fighting the wrong enemy. That they were naive in understanding the internal and external enemy. That they were naive in believing the nature of man would reject the false promises of the enemy. That they failed to purge them in the McCarthy era. That they failed to sop them in the sixties. That they continue to fail to stop them – is still a matter of that damned protestant evangelical optimism and nw European heroism, white man’s burden, and aristocratic mercy is not the same as that they were and still are conspiratorial. Just the opposite.
    And this is exactly what the Russian elites think, and why they call us fools. And its why muslim immigrants refer to europeans as easy ‘victims’. It’s why the jews continue to take advantage of americans – which Bebe has said not so directly but repeatedly. Our morals are both our internal asset and our external risk.
    The smithians were correct. But only if one understands that we europeans domesticated warfare, But the rest of the world still practices TOTAL WAR.
    Which is what I am trying to get across, and somehow for some reason, Luke is opposing that and … well, it caused me to say ‘Ok, I’ve had enough of fighting this team’ for a while and maybe it’s time I just gave up on trying.
    So, you know, I don’t know why this is so hard for y’all to get but brad tried to explain both of your positions to me and he says I’m creating the wrong impression and I think I’m trying to counter a failure to recognize the moral ambitions and the success of those ambitions despite the naivety that both provides those ambitions and allows their undermining.

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:26:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798858999934181376

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798845052959277407

  • Again, Make your point. If it needs an hour it gets an hour. ok. I don’t want to

    Again, Make your point. If it needs an hour it gets an hour. ok. I don’t want to sacrifice what is the primary message we’re getting across. Effectively speaking the convference is a wrapper around the message you’re delivering so it’s no point diluting it. OK?


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 20:35:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798816068623818865

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798812154142847026

  • Phoenicians would have been an admixture of The philistines were the Minoans des

    Phoenicians would have been an admixture of

    The philistines were the Minoans descended primarily from early Neolithic farmers who migrated from Anatolia to Crete sometime between 9,000-6,000 BCE, with some admixture from the existing local populations. These Anatolian farmers, part of the Early European Farmer (EEF) population, had West Asian/Caucasus hunter-gatherer ancestry.

    During the Neolithic period (around 10,000 BCE), farmers from the Fertile Crescent, including Anatolia and the Caucasus, began to migrate into the Levant, mixing with the local populations. So, the Phoenicians, who emerged as a distinct culture around 1500 BCE, were the result of a complex admixture of various populations.

    The genetic makeup of the Phoenicians is believed to have been primarily a mix of local Levantine populations and migrants from the Caucasus and Anatolia.

    The problem with the levant is that it’s a meat grinder and blender of genetics from every direction. Europeans at least know were’re three versions of european hunter gatherers, and then anatolian farmers, and back propagation of eastern european and caucasion huntergatheres in the steppe replacement.

    the middle east is ‘throw your hands up’ in the air and try to filter out the gene pools that are so mixed it’s absurd.

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 20:34:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798815720253599744

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798804918247293033

  • Interesting. I hadn’t thought about that, but you could say the phonecianization

    Interesting. I hadn’t thought about that, but you could say the phonecianization of judaism, the greek-ification of judaism, the romanization of judaism, and the subsequent counter revolution by the regression of chrsitianity into islam, and the counter-revolutions against christianity by first it’s germanization, second by the classical restoration, third by the development of science and empiricism.
    The middle east ceased evolution early. Egypt was stagnant for millennia. the bronze age europeans destroyed their civilization. All the middle east has done is counter-revolt against the indo-european expansion since then.
    Why? because they are incapable of the trust and trustworthiness of the indo europeans. I know this is partly IQ but

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS


    Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 20:16:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798811217789915136

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798805100351160768