Egregoros

Signal feed

Timeline

Post

Remote status

>This project argues that trade is the origin of most problems: from climate change to slavery, waste and pollution, corruption, crime, you name it.

>I sure do love sometimes eating exotic food imported from other parts of Earth.
<Do you know that by eating imported food via trade you are causing climate change, corruption and slavery?
>:meowHuh:

Replies

50
Atheists (for the most part) are rebellious Christians.

They reveal their underlying assumptions when they say things like "40% chance you would have been born an African".

If you're not religious then there is no "you" before you're born (or technically: conceived)...

The Science is an even more frustrating little circle-jerky cult. Most of their ideology is contentious if not outright discredited in the relevant fields, but they still manage to bamboozle ignorant people with their pretense of authority because most actual scientists would rather not waste their time and energy having retarded arguments with retards.

It's funny because was not raised religious, so for me at an instinctive level, the idea of dying and meeting Saint Peter is kind of on par with the idea of dying and meeting Vishnu or something...

That said, to the extent Christianity teaches people not to be dumb, I fully recognize its utility.

So as much as I have difficulty imagining how it is to believe there's a fundamental truth which is Jesus, I have an even HARDER time imagining what it would be like to accept the baseline assumptions of Christianity (the soul, hell, etc), but to actively rebel against the teaching.

Shitlib-Atheism is such a weird mentality to me...
Absolutely yes.

30 years ago nobody knew anything.

Al Gore's movie with the 200 foot tall wave that's because of tHe cLiMaTe was considered like "oh shit maybe we need to worry about this"

Good thing Al Gore also invented the internet, so we now know he's full of shit.
> alien dna

The scientific term for that hypothesis is "Panspermia".

I don't really care to take a side on it, but I think evolution works fast enough - and timelines are long enough - that it is not required in order to explain the world as it is today.

I'd say Christianity's spiritual framework is dynamic enough to provide a beneficial common morality while not being so culturally stifling that it represses innovators and out-of-the-box thinking. The Vatican's historical role as both an archival guardian of human knowledge and patron of scientific advancement cannot be understated.

@vonzeppelin @cjd @phnt @Hoss I think I've mentioned that my wife and I used to host dinners in Chicago and we would have people from every political perspective. And if you didnt agree with the lefties you were "ignorant."

My wife would guffaw when they called me that as I'd typically read several books, watched documentaries, read blog posts and she'd say "then he is the best read ignorant person you've ever met."​

@cjd @phnt @vonzeppelin @Hoss Indeed, the huge vast majority of even White Mankind aren’t in any position to falsify much of anything current within the establishment dataset and paradigm. It’s really a priesthood by every metric. And we find ourselves beholden to them very much like the typical shopkeep in medieval Europe was beholden unto the Papal Church. The Ivory Tower remains gatekept by everything they can throw into it.

Well, it depends on how far you want to stretch it.

If you adopt the "humans are unique metaphysical entities not subject to evolution like animals are", I obviously can't PROVE you wrong more than I can prove we're not in Plato's cave...

BUT, for all intents and purposes, that doesn't really fit with the data. Darwin's evolution is something you can see in plants and animals, you can control it by breeding them, you can even model it in a computer program, and everything works out exactly as predicted. Human behavior does as well - so it's overwhelmingly likely that this is how it works.

But if you say "sure it may be like that, but God set it up" then legitimately unfalsifiable...
@cjd @phnt @KingOfWhiteAmerica @vonzeppelin @Hoss I think there's even solid indications that just the "meat suit" if you want to call it that, suffers from all the same shortcomings and foibles of evolution- even before talking about the Soul!

Sunburns, for example. On Whites, it's a result of relatively thin skin and no pigmentation to absorb UV before it can cause critical DNA damage; this is detected by RNA damage, which will lead to apoptosis. You can see a clear gradient of pigmentation on the "more pigment better" spectrum, all the way down to the equator (before the age of jet travel really fucked up the distribution), which is the solution that the human strain has broadly settled on; REGARDLESS of whether or not that's the best answer! (It's not; we need a protein that can more rapidly recover photonic damage, which might end up coming from photolyases).

Evolution appears to be broadly driven by incremental selection and improvement, followed by extraordinary leaps and chasm-crosses on the whims of fate, and there's a dozen or so examples of human molecular-and-superstructures which indicate this is the case.

@cjd @phnt @vonzeppelin @Hoss Oh you’re talking about the Ark ? Gotcha. Yeah no I personally have no interest in falsifying computer models predicated upon evolutionary models, “Darwinian” or otherwise. I don’t at all doubt environmental pressures result in adaptive response by organisms, which then result in traits changing over time. And I don’t at all doubt it’s possible to “make it all fit” into a coherent “timeline” descending from some hypothetical single common ancestor.

That being said, I do doubt the claim that such a single common ancestor actually existed, within the given biosphere; and that such a model accurately explains the origins of the observed biosphere; and also very much doubt that random mutation is in reality the primary driver of evolution. But if other people believe those things it really isn’t my problem 😆

My main focus is of course on the historical reliability of the Genesis Narrative, up to and including a Global Flood. Independently of current findings in biology, the Narrative stands head-and-shoulders above all others for making sense of the entire scope and span of Human History. The key to seeing this is what I call Intentionality, though maybe other terms are prefered in mainstream literature on the subject about which I’m unaware.

I don't remember the exact numbers here, but I'm gonna say actual mutations account for maybe 3% of evolution, the HEAVY LIFTER is random recombination. Everyone has 2 copies of their DNA, one from each parent - but every parent has 2 copies, so sperm and egg creation is randomly selecting each gene from father or mother genome. That gives you randomness within known-working limits, which is a big amplifier.

"Fitness" is more accurate than "improvement". Adaptations to fit one specific environment can also sometimes be detrimental. See: sickle cell trait, confers malaria resistance in regions where malaria is a persistent selection catalyst, but also causes debilitating genetic disorder when children are born with two copies of the gene.

@Hoss @phnt @cjd @KingOfWhiteAmerica @vonzeppelin Sometimes the replication machinery just doesn't work proper, either. Downs Syndrome, for example.

All of nature's filled with these weird little quirks. Some molecular cornerstone or another gets looped in, is unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, the organism above that change contorts itself to conform. RuBisCo is a really good example of this, it's a carbon-fixing protein that grabs an oxygen half of the time. Photosynthesis is absurdly effective- right up to that point.

There's also some interesting arguments to be made about how certain psychological disorders (psychopathy, bipolar disorder, etc) persist in the population because there were ancestral contexts where selection favored them (a psychopath in the right place becomes a competent Machiavellian political operator, a bipolar individual in certain contexts might become a highly-patronized artist, etc).

@cjd @phnt @vonzeppelin @Hoss @AGARTHA_NOBLE Right, the “random” recombination is faster. I just dispute its actual randomness. In real biology, I think it just “looks random” if it’s beyond ones comprehension. One can obtain “convincing results” modeling with random recombination plus a dash of random mutation; I just dispute that’s what’s actually happening. We simply don’t yet know what we’re looking for.

As such I think evolutionary adaptation can happen much more rapidly - up to and including outright speciation even - under certain influences poorly understood. Obviously it’s not what we’d consider a ”common occurrence”. But it can be more common than it is. Something like hard pleomorphism might provide some confirmatory evidence for the possibility, absent a better understanding of the real forces at play.

Much of the above is outside the current biological paradigm. “Seeing no reason to believe” in Intentionally-driven evolution, in this instance, doesn’t really amount to much - considering the subject matter. Feel free to call it “unfalsifiable” as it won’t hurt my feelings 😆 - you’re not wrong. I’m just not especially attached to an ossified established paradigm that obviously hasn’t answered everything.

> I just dispute its actual randomness.

You can take the position that all apparent randomness in the universe is in fact an expression of God's will.

You will however run into trouble squaring that with the concept of Free Will, which implies that there's some will that's not God's and it's out there influencing things - causing cascading cause-and-effect reactions which end up introducing their own randomness...

Probably. As somebody who has known bipolar individuals, they can have crazy bursts of both productivity and creativity when they're manic, the wealthiest man I know is also a bipolar lunatic. Most of the time somebody born with their wires crossed wrong like that is going to crash and burn, but occasionally they'll find their way into a context where being unhinged in that way plays to their advantage.

@Hoss @phnt @cjd @KingOfWhiteAmerica @vonzeppelin @AGARTHA_NOBLE High-functioning psychopaths have several advantages over normies. They are unable to visualize scenarios where they fail so they are natural risk-takers. They are good at appearing fearless and make decisions very quickly. They are charismatic and glib, so they can get others onboard via charm. And they have very strong downside tolerance as long as they can shift negative outcomes onto others. The high IQ ones go for corporate shark positions, the middling ones become politicians. A sizeable minority become surgeons.