The problem of male-female conflict is the same on both sides. Female and postmodern and feminist control of the academy has led to feminine preference for world order – one that they undrestand – infantilization of both male and female. Childhood is an invention that has been exploited by the enemy just as trust an invention that has been exploited by the enemy, just as free speech is an invention that has been exploited by the enemy. And the liberalism with which western man has treated women is an invention that has been exploited by the enemy. Until the age of maturity you are woman’s problem. At the age of maturity you become men’s problem.
Never again. Our instincts are functionally successful only with in the range we evolved them for. Outside of those ranges they are harmful.
Marriage is the smallest tribe. However it the absolute nuclear family is a middle and upper class capability. Below that the need for traditional intergenerational families is necessary to collect sufficient agency and skill to raise generations.
There is no possible aristocracy of everyone. The anglos got math, logic, language, law, economics, and science, right but mankind wrong. There is no possibility of an aristocracy of everyone. The location-independent absolute nuclear family is limited to those capable of producing sufficient agency and resources to supply a family without assistance from others.
This is almost exclusively western, and within the west, almost exclusively middle class and upward.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47579601_10156823531677264_5296491615739707392_o_10156823531667264.jpg (In studio. working on The Measurement of Art video.)Stephen ThomasStraight up studDec 4, 2018, 12:44 PMAndrea Royallthere will be no living with him after that statementDec 4, 2018, 12:49 PMFlavio DuminucoBriefly what is the situation in Ukraine? Is martial law a good or bad thing?Dec 4, 2018, 12:55 PMSaul SilverDo you do Q&A Or have a FAQ section?Dec 4, 2018, 1:08 PMCurt DoolittleJust post a question on the timeline and either I will, or someone else will, point you to the relevant information.
Keyword search works pretty well.
But if you want to read up most of it is organized online at:
http://propertarianism.com/basic-concepts/Dec 4, 2018, 1:10 PMNoah J RevoyLove the black background. Looks lux and very masculine.Dec 4, 2018, 1:16 PMChris JonesIn my humble opinion your videos are better when you are in conversation with guest as opposed to these one shot monologuesDec 4, 2018, 1:55 PMCurt DoolittleI completely agree. Let’s see how this video on art works. If it doesn’t work, then I’ll find someone to make them with me by walking through the slides and making it more conversational – because that’s what I like as well. It makes i a lot easier for me to ‘envison the audience’.Dec 4, 2018, 2:00 PMTim Beckley-SpillaneThe solo vids have their own virtues tho, too- you’re more likely to stay on point with fewer digressions. They’re prob better for introductory material, as they give a firm foundation for understanding a given topic. The conversational stuff is great for further refinement of ideas and the usually less formal presentation. Also interesting as a window into individual specializations and larger group dynamics within the Prop circle.Dec 4, 2018, 2:36 PMIgor SurkanovWill you be growing a man bun?Dec 4, 2018, 3:18 PMKari Anne DorstadHi dear hugs 🤗Dec 4, 2018, 3:25 PMAndrea RoyallIgor- noDec 4, 2018, 5:01 PMCurt Doolittleum… what? You looking for a fight or somethin’? lolDec 4, 2018, 6:01 PMAnthony ErbesCurt Doolittle Where would you recommend starting at with your work? I only stumbled a crossed you recently through a friend of a friend.Dec 4, 2018, 7:15 PMCurt DoolittleIt’s a big program (huge) so my opinion is that it’s easier to scan through the overview on the web site.
And then watch the videos on youtube.
And then read the overview.Dec 4, 2018, 7:20 PMChris JonesBest thing to do is to follow Curt’s posts every day while simultaneously working your way through the Propertarian Reading List (ALL of Curt’s arguments are vindicated by the current state of knowledge)Dec 4, 2018, 7:32 PMChris JonesAnd watch this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z9NHQdiSZc&t=14sDec 4, 2018, 7:34 PMTim Beckley-Spillane^^^ Classic- we need more Roman in our lives ^^^Dec 4, 2018, 7:38 PMFrancesco PrincipiThe Man.Dec 5, 2018, 4:28 AMNick HeywoodI’m not waving back
That’d just be silly! =DDec 5, 2018, 5:07 AMAnthony ErbesThanks! Curt Doolittle Did you say before your starting a course in January?Dec 7, 2018, 8:45 AMCurt Doolittle^Yes.Dec 7, 2018, 8:50 AMAnthony ErbesCurt Doolittle I’m assuming sign up will be on your propertarian website?Dec 7, 2018, 1:20 PMCurt Doolittleyes. we’re just configuring the software now. Evertyhing takes me longer than I want it to but we get there… lolDec 7, 2018, 1:22 PMAnthony ErbesOk. Yeah. I was having trouble finding it on your site. Do you, yourself, program? Or do you just know the ins and outs of what it is and how to speak about it? I’ve heard you speak about Computer Science in both of the two videos I’ve watched of yours so far. The one with Roman and Red Ice Creations.Dec 7, 2018, 1:28 PM(In studio. working on The Measurement of Art video.)
LOADING: Inserting or removing value judgements, emotions, approval and disapproval, into an argument where they merely obscure the truth.
FRAMING: Inserting or removing narrative into the content to imply motives, incentives, intentions, other than those that exist.
You should know these two tactics as well as substituting disapproval or approval for argument, as well as all the logical fallacies, and the memory, social, and cognitive biases.
If you do not understand these things you are an amateur that needs to maybe study logic and rhetoric, and perhaps the list of ideologies.
See http://retawprojects.com/uploads/politics-ideologies.pdf
We are out of the period of family due to AMPF (Abrahamism, Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism) and as such no longer ‘a people’ but Males and Females in Competition.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47476934_10156823221597264_438795411105251328_o_10156823221592264.jpg THERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING NATURAL DECAY (ENTROPY)Benjamin WoodNuclear > Nat Gas > Coal
I can’t tell how genetically dependent this isDec 4, 2018, 10:24 AMBenjamin WoodAlex as in among different populations? If so, I would tend to agree…seems the more extreme latitudes tend to benefit the most from high-fat diets, which makes sense given the longer winters.Dec 4, 2018, 10:32 AMBenjamin Wood+ variability at the individual level, as well.Dec 4, 2018, 10:32 AMTHERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING NATURAL DECAY (ENTROPY)
Theology readers, vs philosophy readers, vs literature readers, vs historians, vs biologists, vvs jurists, s economists, vs physicist, vs programmers, vs mathematicians.
Teach: Arts, Technologies, Economies, Laws, and Wars.
In other words DEMONSTRATED history, not REPORTED history. Or stated differently, theology, philosophy, literature, and history, are just as vulnerable to REPORTING BIAS as are the pseudosciences of metaphysics, psychology, sociology, and ‘political science’.
What’s the difference, and why have the pseudosciences (reportings) of the written word been so damaging compared to the law, sciences, logics, and mathematics?
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47479755_10156823181772264_909879398499352576_n_10156823181767264.jpg THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS
The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).Bill JoslinYup. You have to think of a battery as “fuel” then measure by energy density. Ultra-caps and Super-caps might change the game – but there is still a fair amount of work to be done.Dec 4, 2018, 9:30 AMAndrew GribbleDan J. Schulte, Steve Schulte, Jeff GanaposkiDec 4, 2018, 9:35 AMCharles H BrennanOn top of that, converting energy to batteries at all loses a large chunk of that energy. So even if weight and output weren’t such problems, providing the energy needed would be brutal.Dec 4, 2018, 9:47 AMCurt DoolittleTHERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING NATURAL DECAY (ENTROPY)Dec 4, 2018, 9:49 AMCurt Doolittle(mining the universe for uranium is insanely cheap.)Dec 4, 2018, 9:50 AMBill JoslinI wonder what is the energy density of liberals?Dec 4, 2018, 9:51 AMCurt DoolittlenegativeDec 4, 2018, 9:53 AMBill JoslinhahahahahaDec 4, 2018, 9:53 AMCharles H BrennanBill Joslin answered aboveDec 4, 2018, 9:54 AMBill JoslinCharles H Brennan only in this group would someone actually come up with a precise and scientific answer in under 2 minutes. hahahahahaDec 4, 2018, 9:55 AMMicah PezdirtzMy question is will we figure out a better energy extraction method than boiling water (for nuclear sources)Dec 4, 2018, 10:41 AMJack RiänImagine how often a company like Amazon would go through LiPo batteries with those drones running 24/7-365. No room for error, as those batteries lose maH with every charge.
Margaret’s gonna be pissed to learn she lost her bulk order of cat toys in a lithium fire two miles from her apartment complexDec 4, 2018, 10:44 AMCharles H BrennanNUCLEAR COMBUSTION ENGINE NOWDec 4, 2018, 10:44 AMJared NeavesA battery with no power left is nominally the same weight as a battery that is full of potential energy… There is a reason especially aircraft do not use batteries, as a precisely calculated nearly empty fuel tank is optimal as it is much lighter than one that is full of fuel, burn fuel to carry fuel as they say.Dec 4, 2018, 11:04 AMJared NeavesWhat is wrong with steam power? It’s pretty damned efficient, you could probably get the same effect with other fluid/gasses but it’s added complexity when it isn’t necessary.Dec 4, 2018, 11:06 AMSteve PenderModular jettisoning of used batteries could work, but that’s another layer of complexity.Dec 4, 2018, 11:46 AMԴավիդ ՎելլաPosts like these are one of the reasons why I’m so glad I follow you on FB. Natural selection was a really great way of improving efficiency. The subject you touched on particularly interests me because of the explosion of diabetes in our societies. We aren’t adapted for a constant refueling with rich energyDec 4, 2018, 12:13 PMRussell WagnerNailed it.Dec 4, 2018, 12:39 PMCurt Doolittleit’s a mistake to reason as such. steam is no different from using fluid in your transmission…..Dec 4, 2018, 12:52 PMSteven J. WoronHmmm maybe my dads idea of slingshots wasn’t so crazy afterall…Dec 4, 2018, 1:32 PMDmitry NikolovMicah Pezdirtz we already have. Liquid salt.
https://youtu.be/uK367T7h6ZYDec 4, 2018, 1:42 PMDmitry NikolovThose drones will never happen. A million things that can go wrong.Dec 4, 2018, 1:45 PMGreg HamiltonKeven KerkamDec 4, 2018, 2:26 PMGreg Hamiltongeothermal works very well in some parts of the country especially if you have a secondary use for the waster water which is still quite warm.
Nuclear is the obvious answer.
I think it was the designers of the game traveler in the 70s that identified a few required items for a big tech jump. Battery storage and non resistive conductors being the two main onesDec 4, 2018, 2:30 PMGreg HamiltonCharles H Brennan call it about a 10% loss going both in and out.Dec 4, 2018, 2:36 PMCharles H BrennanAnd it gets bigger when you scale it up for industrial applications. Hydro storage loses a ton.Dec 4, 2018, 2:40 PMGreg Hamiltoni just know from home level systems that you can expect a 10% loss in heat at every conversion point. Including going from
12v to 120 etc.
My knowledge ends at that scale.Dec 4, 2018, 2:41 PMJeffery Gog Magog HughesMini nuclear reactors for everything. Make all currency u235 tokens.
2 birds with one stone.Dec 4, 2018, 2:43 PMGreg HamiltonCurt Doolittle off subject. In the 90s were you familiar with a zine called Extropy?Dec 4, 2018, 3:08 PMAndrew ClaytonWe aren’t anywhere near a solution to fossil fuels, at least outside science fiction and UFO theories.Dec 4, 2018, 3:30 PMCurt Doolittledoesn’t come to mind. sorry.Dec 4, 2018, 3:48 PMGreg Hamiltonno big deal. It was bio hacking but also guys who thought someday they would upload.
I just like the word extropy as it’s what we do.Dec 4, 2018, 3:50 PMAndrea RoyallBut it’s still a net positive… even the energy density of feces is positive 😞
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2010/ph240/cash2/Dec 4, 2018, 5:07 PMJared NeavesSteve Pender yeah I don’t see faa or casa or other aviation bodies loving the idea of tossing heavy battery cells at the peopleDec 4, 2018, 8:10 PMLuke WillisAnd on this shelf, my collection of buckshot-riddled vibrators…Dec 4, 2018, 9:01 PMKinsley BinghamThe slightest effort researching the environmental impacts of electric battery production should bring pause to those who sincerely care about the world’s ecology.Dec 5, 2018, 9:25 AMJayque OoshHonestly it’s pretty magical that simple animal fat has a comparable energy density to coal.
Crazy how nature do dat
Why don’t we consider pork a renewable energy source?Dec 6, 2018, 8:15 AMJayque OoshRhetorical question, because it tastes too good to throw in the Stirling gennyDec 6, 2018, 8:16 AMLeon ScamahornWe need to develop materials that are as strong as steel and aluminum but as light as a feather. This is an exaggeration but you get the idea. Vehicles weigh less but can do the same work burns less carbon based fuels.Dec 7, 2018, 11:11 AMTHIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS
The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47479755_10156823181772264_909879398499352576_n_10156823181767264.jpg THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS
The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).Bill JoslinYup. You have to think of a battery as “fuel” then measure by energy density. Ultra-caps and Super-caps might change the game – but there is still a fair amount of work to be done.Dec 4, 2018, 9:30 AMAndrew GribbleDan J. Schulte, Steve Schulte, Jeff GanaposkiDec 4, 2018, 9:35 AMCurt DoolittleTHERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING NATURAL DECAY (ENTROPY)Dec 4, 2018, 9:49 AMCurt Doolittle(mining the universe for uranium is insanely cheap.)Dec 4, 2018, 9:50 AMBill JoslinI wonder what is the energy density of liberals?Dec 4, 2018, 9:51 AMCurt DoolittlenegativeDec 4, 2018, 9:53 AMBill JoslinhahahahahaDec 4, 2018, 9:53 AMBill JoslinCharles H Brennan only in this group would someone actually come up with a precise and scientific answer in under 2 minutes. hahahahahaDec 4, 2018, 9:55 AMMicah PezdirtzMy question is will we figure out a better energy extraction method than boiling water (for nuclear sources)Dec 4, 2018, 10:41 AMJack RiänImagine how often a company like Amazon would go through LiPo batteries with those drones running 24/7-365. No room for error, as those batteries lose maH with every charge.
Margaret’s gonna be pissed to learn she lost her bulk order of cat toys in a lithium fire two miles from her apartment complexDec 4, 2018, 10:44 AMJared NeavesA battery with no power left is nominally the same weight as a battery that is full of potential energy… There is a reason especially aircraft do not use batteries, as a precisely calculated nearly empty fuel tank is optimal as it is much lighter than one that is full of fuel, burn fuel to carry fuel as they say.Dec 4, 2018, 11:04 AMJared NeavesWhat is wrong with steam power? It’s pretty damned efficient, you could probably get the same effect with other fluid/gasses but it’s added complexity when it isn’t necessary.Dec 4, 2018, 11:06 AMSteve PenderModular jettisoning of used batteries could work, but that’s another layer of complexity.Dec 4, 2018, 11:46 AMRussell WagnerNailed it.Dec 4, 2018, 12:39 PMCurt Doolittleit’s a mistake to reason as such. steam is no different from using fluid in your transmission…..Dec 4, 2018, 12:52 PMSteven J. WoronHmmm maybe my dads idea of slingshots wasn’t so crazy afterall…Dec 4, 2018, 1:32 PMDmitry NikolovMicah Pezdirtz we already have. Liquid salt.
https://youtu.be/uK367T7h6ZYDec 4, 2018, 1:42 PMDmitry NikolovThose drones will never happen. A million things that can go wrong.Dec 4, 2018, 1:45 PMGreg HamiltonKeven KerkamDec 4, 2018, 2:26 PMGreg Hamiltongeothermal works very well in some parts of the country especially if you have a secondary use for the waster water which is still quite warm.
Nuclear is the obvious answer.
I think it was the designers of the game traveler in the 70s that identified a few required items for a big tech jump. Battery storage and non resistive conductors being the two main onesDec 4, 2018, 2:30 PMJeffery Gog Magog HughesMini nuclear reactors for everything. Make all currency u235 tokens.
2 birds with one stone.Dec 4, 2018, 2:43 PMGreg HamiltonCurt Doolittle off subject. In the 90s were you familiar with a zine called Extropy?Dec 4, 2018, 3:08 PMAndrew ClaytonWe aren’t anywhere near a solution to fossil fuels, at least outside science fiction and UFO theories.Dec 4, 2018, 3:30 PMCurt Doolittledoesn’t come to mind. sorry.Dec 4, 2018, 3:48 PMGreg Hamiltonno big deal. It was bio hacking but also guys who thought someday they would upload.
I just like the word extropy as it’s what we do.Dec 4, 2018, 3:50 PMAndrea RoyallBut it’s still a net positive… even the energy density of feces is positive 😞
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2010/ph240/cash2/Dec 4, 2018, 5:07 PMJared NeavesSteve Pender yeah I don’t see faa or casa or other aviation bodies loving the idea of tossing heavy battery cells at the peopleDec 4, 2018, 8:10 PMLuke WillisAnd on this shelf, my collection of buckshot-riddled vibrators…Dec 4, 2018, 9:01 PMKinsley BinghamThe slightest effort researching the environmental impacts of electric battery production should bring pause to those who sincerely care about the world’s ecology.Dec 5, 2018, 9:25 AMJayque OoshHonestly it’s pretty magical that simple animal fat has a comparable energy density to coal.
Crazy how nature do dat
Why don’t we consider pork a renewable energy source?Dec 6, 2018, 8:15 AMJayque OoshRhetorical question, because it tastes too good to throw in the Stirling gennyDec 6, 2018, 8:16 AMLeon ScamahornWe need to develop materials that are as strong as steel and aluminum but as light as a feather. This is an exaggeration but you get the idea. Vehicles weigh less but can do the same work burns less carbon based fuels.Dec 7, 2018, 11:11 AMTHIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS
The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).
