@RVLawsonAuthor (a) not an argument (b) GSRRM (c) proving my point.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 03:38:13 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106129541935518824
Source: Original Site Post
-
@SaraBellun Sorry. What question?
@SaraBellun Sorry. What question?
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 01:18:24 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128992150011925
-
(insult that men with high spatial IQ’s can’t figureout how to load the dishwash
(insult that men with high spatial IQ’s can’t figureout how to load the dishwasher)
Women will brag of their higher verbal IQ’s yet fail to produce the most basic abstract analogy, or an argument free of female cognitive bias for conflating truth and desirability, truth and “face”, individual and distribution, and an endless list of variations on those themes.
(Insult that appeals to GSRRM that I”m somehow offended)
Nope. Just spinning the humor for the male audience. Meanwhile, in response, you act like a woman whose flirtations were laughed at. 😉 Providing evidence confirming my statement.
The irony is … well. Tedious really.
(Another Insult that’s an adhominem not a denial.)
“Woman” who demonstrates the female emotional bias to undermine rather than refute. 😉
(Another Ad Hom)
I dunno. I just do the science. I let the Twitterati amuse the peasantry with marxist bread and postmodern circus leaving them empty of mind and body, but distracted by the action at the show.
This is an area of my expertise – the female method of conflict and deceit and the failure of law to suppress female ‘violence’ as much as male. So you know, I can do this all day long.
I work in the Formal logic of decidability in science, economics, law and testimony. Writing proofs of construction from first causes in and across behavioral sciences. And no you wouldn’t understand. 🙂 It requires deep knowledge of multiple fields, not the least of which is cog sci.
I don’t do humanities. I just do the data. 😉 there is consistency between physics, neurology, demonstrated behavior, evolution, their measurement in economics and in law. The first principles are consistent across all formal, physical, behavioral, evolutionary sciences.
Cheers.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 00:46:28 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128866562302604
-
WHY DO WESTERN WOMEN UNDERMINE WESTERN CIVILIZATION? 1. Anglos converted to 100%
WHY DO WESTERN WOMEN UNDERMINE WESTERN CIVILIZATION?
1. Anglos converted to 100% middle class, seeking cheap success in democracy without paying the cost of maintaining our intellectual, social, economic, political advantage by military service, unity, political control.
2. Aryanism (European civilization’s core drive) is heroic so breeds altruism and virtue signaling. It is the direction of dominance expression to the production of commons.
3. Christianity teaches submission, pacifism, tolerance, and amplifies altruism, altruistic punishment, and virtue signal spirals if virtue can be proxied through political pretense instead of personal action at personal cost. Fake Christians. Fake Christian Ethics.
4. And Women are the worst. They seek attention. They seek attention as aggressively as men seek sex. And verbal signaling is cheaper for them than men’s signaling status by demonstrated achievement.
5. And they seek safety. They seek safety by signaling non-aggression. They seek safety by virtue-signaling non-aggression. They used mass communication combined with women in the voting pool, to virtue signal without personal cost.
6. They created a market of escalating demands for attention, and escalating demand for attention by virtue signaling of non-aggression,thereby producing virtue signal spirals that convert from non-aggression and tolerance to aggression and intolerance.(Just as Popper predicted.)
7. This demand for attention, the pretense of non-aggression, virtue signaling (value signaling), and escalating demand for attention by virtue-signaling into virtue signal spirals, that turns into intolerance, aggression and undermining …
8. … is simply female social super-predation industrialized by mass communication, where the costs of their political ‘accommodation’ of the enemies of civilization are born by men and men alone.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 00:36:18 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128826590914173
-
@BannonWarRoom YES. YES. YES
@BannonWarRoom YES. YES. YES.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 00:34:16 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128818629035000
-
RACE DIFFERENCES ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO EQUILIBRATE Brains grow individually just lik
RACE DIFFERENCES ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO EQUILIBRATE
Brains grow individually just like fingerprints, from whatever they’re connected to. There are around 50 brain regions, and around 15-18 are more influential than most, of those, and have more in and out connections than others, and the utmost are related to language.
There are either four or five generations of man living today, each with about a 10% difference in average intelligence over the other. This means equality is impossible without natural selection by political means at the bottom of the earlier generations and their admixtures.
Our difference in cognitive ability is the result of many things going right, and not going wrong (genetic load), and our personality due to these variations in regional influence, with the most influential factor our sex, that causes the greatest differences.
Because we are adapting by rates of learning now, and resulting economic cooperation, leaving many behind – unfit for basic work. It may be possible for chemical means of increasing intelligence in utero or by genetic means over time. But it appears to require hundreds of genes.
Man may be trained against racism, but we cannot train god, nature, and evolution against the fact that the races consist of four to five generations of man, due to isolation, speciation, and some later hybridization.
To strike a little fear into the heart of many: the most obvious and urgent ‘great filter’ is not nuclear war, or climate, or geological, or astronomic crisis, but our inability to restore nature selection by continuing the ancient practice of limiting reproduction of the unfit.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 00:33:48 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128816743987255
-
You want a government office that makes a difference? Legislate a 12 Year Office
You want a government office that makes a difference? Legislate a 12 Year Office to repatriate every aspect of strategic industry, at zero interest, over 20 years, from the treasury, regardless of cost, and staff it by over 40’s from the top biz consulting firms.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-26 00:29:50 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106128801147469042
-
@Zorost Exactly. The Khan was WRONG
@Zorost Exactly. The Khan was WRONG.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-23 15:37:33 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106115383501861354
-
THE LAST QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY The question isn’t how we get along, i
THE LAST QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
The question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question:
“Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?”
The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest.
So, as the Great Khan said:
“Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.”
“We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.”
The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit.
The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means. The europeans killed the males and kept the females. The Persians stayed insular but were invaded by the Arabs, the indo-iranian’s are gone. The Anatolians are gone. The Caucasians are all but gone.
So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was the right answer.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-23 14:47:13 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106115185623836504
-
@Afterrthought Smart. Thanks. Didn’t think of that. I’ll work it in and show the
@Afterrthought Smart. Thanks. Didn’t think of that. I’ll work it in and show the branching path as yet ‘tribe’ dependent, ending in nietzsche.
Source date (UTC): 2021-04-23 14:42:00 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106115165062824603