Theme: Science

  • BTW: If you don’t know the science in depth please don’t virtue signal or counte

    BTW: If you don’t know the science in depth please don’t virtue signal or counter signal in pretense you do. It wastes my time by demonstrating your intellectual dishonesty in defense of the truth. Its coercive, a theft and immoral.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-18 23:52:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769874543705739303

    Reply addressees: @RobSchebel73664

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769868415991193896

  • Too many to list. Think of it more as a reduction to first principles of the pre

    Too many to list. Think of it more as a reduction to first principles of the present state of all knowledge across all disciplines – which is, of course, my project: universal commensurability and testifiability (truth). A project that was not possible for previous generations.

    Where possible I make use of terms from existing terminology and research and then explain them causally. This should and does lower the resistance to the ideas. I avoid neologisms whenever possible. And prefer to ‘correctly’ disambiguate and define terms instead.

    Reply addressees: @bootlegapples


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-18 18:12:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769789076725489664

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769788209901281661

  • The Big Lie Of Limited Genetic Differences Also: claiming that statistical diffe

    The Big Lie Of Limited Genetic Differences
    Also: claiming that statistical differences in genetic composition imply the equality of those differences is not only pseudoscientific but false and deceptive – because not all mutations, variations, and expressions produce equally selective effects.
    We know the direction of evolution favors neotenic selection (domestication syndrome) because of the extraordinary advantage of increases in cooperation by increases in agency (self regulation).
    The rest of the variations that persist are minor in comparison – usually local adaptation to food and disease sources.
    Neotenic evolution prolongs gestation, childhood (sexual maturity), and lifespan, producing increases in neural development (agency, self regulation) and adaptation (intelligence), as well cooperation by the suppression of impulsivity and aggression. The phenotypic expression that’s rather obvious is reduction of migration of stem cells from the neural tube retaining childhood features into adulthood.
    We don’t know how many changes have been necessary to produce domestication syndrome, but as we can can see from our domestication of animals, the behavioral and physical expressions are the same.
    It should not be terribly challenging to survey the most neotenous populations of the four major races (african, south eurasian, european, and east eurasian) and discover how many of those variations are encoded in the genome and how many are simply regulations of expression.
    The four races are separated by african -> south eurasian (1SD), south eurasian to european (1SD) -> European to east asian(½SD) with all other groups consisting of hybrids with almost perfect demonstration of equilibration between the gene pools.
    The four races, for this reason, differ in class sizes because class size roughly consists variation in intelligence and self regulation, and those variations expressed in capacity for scale of responsibility.
    The resulting differences in class sizes result in the visible differences in intelligence.
    And this is why group intelligence (measured by country, measured by ethnicity) is the single most important property of a population with the greatest determination of outcome of all properties of man whether genetic, developmental, cultural, institutional, or geographic.

    No more lies.
    Lies prevent us from the optimum polities with the optimum governments and the optimum policies: homogeneity produces a reduction of conflict.

    Reply addressees: @MindEnjoyer @Glace15840573


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-17 20:41:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769464027132899328

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1769460311860424802

  • For Hayekians, Libertarians Classical Liberals, please see Hayek’s theory of the

    For Hayekians, Libertarians Classical Liberals, please see Hayek’s theory of the mind “The Sensory Order” vs what we know today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HCjH6F4Lyo&t=3147s

    NLI Office Hours: Today, Friday March 15th
    0:00 tech check – introduction
    3:38 Q1 on Thomas Paine’s book “Common Sense”…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-15 20:35:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768737817281126591

  • For Hayekians, Libertarians Classical Liberals, please see Hayek’s theory of the

    For Hayekians, Libertarians Classical Liberals, please see Hayek’s theory of the mind “The Sensory Order” vs what we know today: https://t.co/8kpmD99vQz

    NLI Office Hours: Today, Friday March 15th
    0:00 tech check – introduction
    3:38 Q1 on Thomas Paine’s book “Common Sense”
    22:40 Q2 on Thomas Jefferson’s vision of a nation of farmers
    33:00 (Ad Hoc) On state incrementalism, and ATF bashing
    46:05 Q3 on the differences btw Martin and whatifalthist
    52:25 Q5 disambiguating “fascism”
    1:05. Q4 on Hayek’s theory of the mind “The Sensory Order”


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-15 20:35:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768737817117495296

  • Missed the last bit. Gravity: Newton improves on Aristotle, Einstein improves on

    Missed the last bit.
    Gravity: Newton improves on Aristotle, Einstein improves on Newton. Shortly someone will improve on Einstein – with MOND looking increasingly close, we just need to know why.
    My work improves on Hayek, Popper, and Hoppe in particular, and a bit more so on Chomsky in language, and Wolfram in reducibility.
    I don’t know of anyone who has done work on cognitive differences, particularly the sexes, and specifically on sex differences in lying, or group evolutionary differences in first causes.

    Reply addressees: @shade_forrest


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-15 19:37:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768723134310494208

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768698362193236190

  • Furthermore, hayek’s criticism of scientism includes the near impossibility of r

    Furthermore, hayek’s criticism of scientism includes the near impossibility of running economic tests, rather than observing and explaining economic causality.
    You mentioned determinism, and while it is true that human behavior follows generally determinable rules like evolution and language it does not follow deterministic rules as do the physical sciences.

    Hydrogen and oxygen don’t get the choice of whether to make water. We have the choice to do what we wish.

    Reply addressees: @shade_forrest


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-15 19:09:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768716073837248512

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768698362193236190

  • I would need to understand how you interpret these terms. The context driving Ha

    I would need to understand how you interpret these terms. The context driving Hayek and Mises is their refutation of marxism, so called ‘scientific socialism’, and Keynesianism. Despite that the revolution in economics was the introduction of the combination of the calculus with darwinian evolution. But at the same time those were introduced, Babbage had already failed to systematize computation, so until Turing (and Chomsky’s application of Turing to language) so that mathmatics was still the gold standard and they tried to ‘fit’ math to behavior despite it’s insufficiency, and they ignored evolutionary selection. So we had a vast collapse of human intellectual progress because of babbage’s failure and marx’s pseudoscience, and the failure of wester philosophers’ analytic projct by treating math and in particular set theory as the gold standard instead of evolutionary computation.

    Reply addressees: @shade_forrest


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-15 19:06:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768715376051830784

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1768698362193236190

  • Neil Turok: Physics Went Wrong

    Neil Turok: Physics Went Wrong https://youtu.be/4OFzBd-UoqM?si=70OfhliiRE_AH_Aj


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-12 23:18:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1767691640020377884

  • We address this issue with ‘limits based reasoning, and full accounting’. Cheste

    We address this issue with ‘limits based reasoning, and full accounting’. Chesterson’s era lacked the knowledge of the universe that we have learned, and so he couldn’t think beyond the second order framework. But the general direction of his reasoning was correct. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-11 17:12:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1767237075256955035

    Reply addressees: @FuryForth @GlitchAmer85803 @Y_Contributor @RebuildingtheA2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1767042262242828564