RT @MartianHoplite: @curtdoolittle “The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting” – Milan Kundera
That’…
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 18:39:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176566744380522496
Empirical and Testimonial (vs supernatural and imaginary).
Judaism to undermine.
Christianity to weaken.
Islam to destroy
The Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth , Duty, Commons and Jury to set us free, and keep us free.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 16:40:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176174516646699015
Reply addressees: @financydrew
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176174216774901764
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@financydrew Yes. Thank you. Islam, judaism, and even some parts of christianity, are threats to us. They are the antithesis of western Sovereignty (vs submission), Reciprocity (vs parasitism, cheating, stealing), Truth (vs abrahamic deceit), Duty (vs avoidance), Commons (vs consumption)…
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176174216774901764
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@financydrew Yes. Thank you. Islam, judaism, and even some parts of christianity, are threats to us. They are the antithesis of western Sovereignty (vs submission), Reciprocity (vs parasitism, cheating, stealing), Truth (vs abrahamic deceit), Duty (vs avoidance), Commons (vs consumption)…
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176174216774901764
4. As such your proposition seeks a permissive definition under which we do not scrutinize (practice skepticism). Are his assets earned? Are here breasts real? Are you signaling VIRTUE WITH OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY. And that’s the question that plagues us. The virtue signal theft.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 16:36:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176173594751184898
Reply addressees: @EPoe187
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176173233659404289
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@EPoe187 3. So the presumption in the literature is that it’s ‘evidence’. If it is just communication, then the central problem is that humans innovate to lie (cheat) more than they innovate to compete (produce).
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176173233659404289
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@EPoe187 3. So the presumption in the literature is that it’s ‘evidence’. If it is just communication, then the central problem is that humans innovate to lie (cheat) more than they innovate to compete (produce).
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176173233659404289
Fields, Not Ideals, Truths, Or Favorites https://propertarianism.com/2019/09/23/fields-not-ideals-truths-or-favorites/
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 15:18:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176153768532090880
RT @MartianHoplite: The future may already be written. But it can never be read. The first time it is, it’s the present. After that, it’s t…
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 01:03:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175938784518709248
So sorry if I seem pedantic but just wanted to work through this nit because it’s a common equivalency I want to be able to answer cogently. – Thanks. ( And yeah, there is something very wrong with physics. 😉 )
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 16:12:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175080333739532288
Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175080080873349122
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@PoseidonAwoke And so, I assume what you’re pointing out is that bias and deceit is available in each of these grammars – and the knowledge of the difference between collective consistency and correspondence and coherence, and an act of deceit, depends on deltas of knowledge in and across each.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175080080873349122
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@PoseidonAwoke And so, I assume what you’re pointing out is that bias and deceit is available in each of these grammars – and the knowledge of the difference between collective consistency and correspondence and coherence, and an act of deceit, depends on deltas of knowledge in and across each.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175080080873349122
Butch, not that I want to persuade you of anything one way or the other, but this theme of yours is consistent. … Just because knowledge is incomplete does not mean it does not advance toward completeness. Sciences produce consistent increases in knowledge by trial and error.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 15:17:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175066411523350528
Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175009513306505218
IN REPLY TO:
@PoseidonAwoke
And yet over thousands of years of Man’s observations of the stars we have yet to detect even an inch of parallax. How can that be? If observation does not line up with what the “scientists” are telling you, should you go on faith (in science)? If so, then that’s your religion. https://t.co/feZ0FJuHNy
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175009513306505218
So the only purpose of reciprocity, negotiation, and truth is to seek continuation of returns on reciprocity – meaning TRADES that increase capital rather than consume it. So if one will not engage in reciprocity (trade), or boycott (secession) only violence remains.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-19 16:42:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174725355917250566
Reply addressees: @willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174724732685602818
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke Now the average, and educated american, no longer knows this because you (leftists) have been successful in your postmodern attack on the natural law, the constitution knowledge to preserve it, science of our differences, and truthful speech in persuasion about it.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174724732685602818
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke Now the average, and educated american, no longer knows this because you (leftists) have been successful in your postmodern attack on the natural law, the constitution knowledge to preserve it, science of our differences, and truthful speech in persuasion about it.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174724732685602818
What has greater evidentiary content?
True or False?
Voluntary or Involuntary?
Consent or Retaliation?
In other words, is the positiva or negativa more decidable?
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-19 02:11:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174506184734400512
Reply addressees: @KralcTrebor @Darren_B_Lane @primalpoly
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174469545068769280
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174469545068769280
—“Then please explain [ insert absurd moronic, sophomoric, pseudoscientific, ahistorical, or supernatural claim here ].”—- An Idiot