Definition of Power

3 small cities in Alberta.  Population of the entire province just under 4.5million and getting 1600 cases/day 36 deaths today.  80ish% vaxxed. 

19 hours ago, Dglgmut said:

19 hours ago, william.scherk said:

How many deaths are reported in Victoria may be a useful question. But where did you see this information shared?

[...] Any evidence that the vaxx is effective is completely irrelevant.

Here's the story:

Here's another story:

Vic. Health Minister Martin Foley's vaccination gaffe fuels misinformation around the globe - ABC News

WWW.ABC.NET.AU

---

A momentary slip of the tongue from Victorian Health Minister Martin Foley at a press conference this week is being used in anti-vaccine messaging in Australia and overseas.

I don't know a single peson who has had the flu since March 2020.

Not a kid, no one.

It's a flu d'etat.

Stock market traders use to speak of painting the tape.

Same thing here, only the underlying commodity has changed.

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Here's another story:

Vic. Health Minister Martin Foley's vaccination gaffe fuels misinformation around the globe - ABC News

WWW.ABC.NET.AU

---

A momentary slip of the tongue from Victorian Health Minister Martin Foley at a press conference this week is being used in anti-vaccine messaging in Australia and overseas.

 

Thanks for the correction. I did wonder if it was a mis-speak, but when I found it in text form I figured he had read it correctly.

That makes more sense; I thought this was a potential turning point for the waning of the vaxx effectiveness.

58 minutes ago, Marc said:

I don't know a single peson who has had the flu since March 2020.

Not a kid, no one.

It's a flu d'etat.

Stock market traders use to speak of painting the tape.

Same thing here, only the underlying commodity has changed.

It's public information that the PCR test cannot tell the difference between flu and COVID. It doesn't even detect viruses, it detects genetic sequences which can be found in healthy and unhealthy people alike.

On 10/1/2021 at 3:40 PM, Dglgmut said:

It's public information that the PCR test cannot tell the difference between flu and COVID.

If this is not utter bullshit, you should be able to provide this "public information."

You can read about what the PCR actually is in other places than mainstream media. Just because it's not on CNN does not mean it's not public information. The inventor made a number of statements about the limits of the PCR technique while he was alive and other accomplished scientists have spoken out as well.

Here's an article on the lack of specificity of the test:

The point is that it cannot tell the difference between healthy and diseased, let alone flu and COVID. If you have flu-like symptoms and you test positive, you're obviously now considered a COVID case.

Are you pushing back as hard against socially amplified information as you are against the counter-narrative?? Are you being objective or are you looking for answers that are easier for you to defend while still feeling like an intellectual?

16 hours ago, william.scherk said:

If this is not utter bullshit, you should be able to provide this "public information."

Considering the amount of internet snooping you do, it's quite an indication of the degree of censorship and suppression on the subject of Covid that you weren’t aware that the PCR procedure (which was never intended as a test) lacks specificity.

Here are some quotes from the article Dglgmut linked to:

I don't know anything about the people being quoted except that what they say is accurate.

===

According to Jason Hommel, a prolific writer and researcher and also the author of the very important article regarding coronavirus testing entitled “Scientists Say the COVID19 Test Kits Do Not Work, Are Worthless, and Give Impossible Results”:

“PCR basically takes a sample of your cells and amplifies any DNA to look for ‘viral sequences’, i.e. bits of non-human DNA that seem to match parts of a known viral genome. The problem is the test is known not to work. It uses ‘amplification’ which means taking a very very tiny amount of DNA and growing it exponentially until it can be analysed. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery. Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues.The idea these kits can isolate a specific virus like COVID-19 is nonsense.”

===

[…] from an article also by Celia Farber, David Crowe, “a Canadian researcher with a degree in biology and mathematics and host of “The Infectious Myth” podcast, also the president of the think-tank Rethinking AIDS, also clearly explained the problems with the PCR based coronavirus testing, “revealing a world of unimaginable complexity, as well as trickery”:

“The first thing to know is that the test is not binary. In fact, I don’t think there are any tests for infectious disease that are positive or negative. What they do is they take some kind of a continuum and they arbitrarily say this point is the difference between positive and negative.”

He continued:

“PCR is really a manufacturing technique. You start with one molecule. You start with a small amount of DNA and on each cycle the amount doubles, which doesn’t sound like that much, but if you, if you double 30 times, you get approximately a billion times more material than you started with. So as a manufacturing technique, it’s great. What they do is they attach a fluorescent molecule to the RNA as they produce it.  You shine a light at one wavelength, and you get a response, you get light sent back at a different wavelength. So, they measure the amount of light that comes back and that’s their surrogate for how much DNA there is. I’m using the word DNA. There’s a step in RT- PCR test which is where you convert the RNA to DNA. So, the PCR test is actually not using the viral RNA. It’s using DNA, but it’s like the complimentary RNA. So logically it’s the same thing, but it can be confusing. Like why am I suddenly talking about DNA? Basically, there’s a certain number of cycles.”

Regarding Kary Mullis’ intention for the PCR, this is what he said:

“I’m sad that he isn’t here to defend his manufacturing technique. Kary did not invent a test. He invented a very powerful manufacturing technique that is being abused. What are the best applications for PCR? Not medical diagnostics. He knew that and he always said that.”

===

Ellen

On 10/1/2021 at 3:40 PM, Dglgmut said:

On 10/1/2021 at 2:40 PM, Marc said:

I don't know a single peson who has had the flu since March 2020.

It's public information that the PCR test cannot tell the difference between flu and COVID.

Revisiting this, after some persistent "snooping." 

The issue of tests has come up in the household since the barriers to normal border traffic are coming down your end. One of my siblings travels internationally as a flight attendant, but we often take the land border crossing nearby for authentic Mexican eats and general day-tripping, bargain-milk-shopping and visiting our great aunt in Seattle (she's now 103).

The newest 'relaxed' rules for entering the USA by air take effect today -- passengers are required to be fully-vaccinated and to have a recent negative COVID-19 test; combining these strictures with the slightly harsher and stupider newest Canada re-entry requirements means some advance planning.

Basically, to get into the USA by land, we need to show that we are fully-vaccinated, but don't have to provide negative results from a COVID-19 test. But, of course, to get back into Canada, we have to prove we are fully-vaccinated and provide a negative COVID-19 test. 

This mismatch of course is going to hurt the border communities to the south that rely to some part on Canadian visitors. I expect the testing requirement for Canadians returning north by land to be put aside sometime soon ...

In any case, what tests do you or I need to get from here to there and back to the here? Firstly, no antigen tests. Secondly to twentiethly ...

Quote

Types of pre-entry test

• Rapid antigen tests aren't accepted.

Accepted types of molecular tests

• PCR - Polymerase chain reaction
• Nucleic acid test (NAT) or Nucleic acid amplification test (NAATs)
• Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP)

These tests use methods such as a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab, nose swab, or saliva sample.

Other acceptable types of tests

• RT-PCR – reverse transcription real time PCR
• Quantitative PCR (qPCR)
• Isothermal amplification
• Droplet digital PCR or digital droplet PCR (ddPCR)
• Transcription-mediated amplification (TMA)
• RNA (Ribonucleic acid)
• Ct (cycle threshold)
• CRISPR
• Sequencing
• Next generational sequencing (NGS) or whole genome sequencing (WGS)
• Oxford Nanopore sequencing (LamPORE)
• Detection of the N gene
• Detection of Orf1a/b
• Detection of the S gene
• Detection of the E gene
• Detection of the RdRp gene

 I got on the "How does RT-PRC (purportedly) work?" train in Snoopsville.  A couple of videos from the trip stood out as being sufficiently detailed to be informational, but not insanely technical.  Here's one:

On 11/8/2021 at 3:55 PM, william.scherk said:

Revisiting this, after some persistent "snooping." 

That particular post was research, and research of direct personal relevance to you if you want to be doing Canada/U.S. Border transversings and you need a negative Covid test to get back in Canada from the U.S.

Another fairly recent post you did was curiosity-motivated research.  You wanted to know the meaning of a term ("corresponding author").

However, your typical activity is snooping - poking around, not for the sake of finding truth but for the sake of finding dirt, something to sneer at.

Ellen

Back on topic: I understood the root of power to be loyalty, pretty soon after creating this thread. Power is definitely in numbers, as human beings are the most dangerous things on this planet. To make people fear you, if that's how you use your power, first you must have people that will follow you.

I didn't think about it much more than that... now I've found this:

https://spandrell.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/

Here is a good video reading over some of the post with additional commentary.

This is a very incisive theory on how power can be built through false compassion and the mechanics of why it works. Highly recommend looking into this, as it is very elucidating.

11 hours ago, Dglgmut said:

Back on topic: I understood the root of power to be loyalty, pretty soon after creating this thread. Power is definitely in numbers, as human beings are the most dangerous things on this planet. To make people fear you, if that's how you use your power, first you must have people that will follow you.

I didn't think about it much more than that... now I've found this:

https://spandrell.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/

Here is a good video reading over some of the post with additional commentary.

This is a very incisive theory on how power can be built through false compassion and the mechanics of why it works. Highly recommend looking into this, as it is very elucidating.

Fantastic video!!!!!!

Thank you for posting it.

I agree with the analysis of capturing and manipulating people’s innate psychology for recruitment , but ‘his’ audience is not a club I’d be comfortable ‘having a beer ‘ with , not just because I prefer sweet tea, more so because I fear such a gathering would devolve into a pleasant remembrance of other beer hall events. 

The comment section of this blog is a proof of the warning of what happens when you push all dissident or adjacent elements into darker corners to combat ‘hate’ by de-platforming . Instead of allowing bad ideas to be countered by reason , real hate and irrationality festers and feeds itself .

This is the first of seen or heard of this blogger , is he a Daily Stormer contributor ?

2 hours ago, tmj said:

I agree with the analysis of capturing and manipulating people’s innate psychology for recruitment , but ‘his’ audience is not a club I’d be comfortable ‘having a beer ‘ with , not just because I prefer sweet tea, more so because I fear such a gathering would devolve into a pleasant remembrance of other beer hall events. 

The comment section of this blog is a proof of the warning of what happens when you push all dissident or adjacent elements into darker corners to combat ‘hate’ by de-platforming . Instead of allowing bad ideas to be countered by reason , real hate and irrationality festers and feeds itself .

This is the first of seen or heard of this blogger , is he a Daily Stormer contributor ?

Honestly I am not that familiar with him. I heard about his IQ Shredder post a while ago, and read that... but nothing since until this Biological Leninism theory. He does make a little bit too many grammar and syntax errors to be taken too seriously, but I think he does pick up on things that are important and true.

I also find "hate" off-putting, but it's hard to tell what is real hate and what is a reaction to being told what to say and think. There are people who make it a moral point to counteract the "safe-space" mentality pushed by the mainstream. Regardless, you never have to agree with a person 100% to get something from their thoughts.

One thing I take away from his writing is that there really isn't a difference between peace and war. People never stop clamouring for status, and there will always be resentment between groups. Even though there is not open violence, in times of peace people are still positioning themselves to make the changes they want to make--and a healthy society needs a defence against this.

29 minutes ago, Dglgmut said:

Honestly I am not that familiar with him. I heard about his IQ Shredder post a while ago, and read that... but nothing since until this Biological Leninism theory. He does make a little bit too many grammar and syntax errors to be taken too seriously, but I think he does pick up on things that are important and true.

 

I also find "hate" off-putting, but it's hard to tell what is real hate and what is a reaction to being told what to say and think. There are people who make it a moral point to counteract the "safe-space" mentality pushed by the mainstream. Regardless, you never have to agree with a person 100% to get something from their thoughts.

 

One thing I take away from his writing is that there really isn't a difference between peace and war. People never stop clamouring for status, and there will always be resentment between groups. Even though there is not open violence, in times of peace people are still positioning themselves to make the changes they want to make--and a healthy society needs a defence against this.

Perhaps a healthier , at least political , society would somehow look less like two large factions vying for near total political power. And more like system or culture that can disincentive partisan-ism  and the drive for centralization , and take fuller advantage of a republic centered around the concept of separation of powers .

I’ll take bureaucratic constitutionalists chosen by a multiplicity of pluralities. The odds of getting a uniparty , read commissars, are higher when the only choices are two , odds are one is gonna pull it off.

27 minutes ago, tmj said:

Perhaps a healthier , at least political , society would somehow look less like two large factions vying for near total political power. And more like system or culture that can disincentive partisan-ism  and the drive for centralization , and take fuller advantage of a republic centered around the concept of separation of powers .

I’ll take bureaucratic constitutionalists chosen by a multiplicity of pluralities. The odds of getting a uniparty , read commissars, are higher when the only choices are two , odds are one is gonna pull it off.

 

That's like hoping for new competition for Coke and Pepsi. People trust in bigger organizations, because those organizations became big by building trust in the first place.

The dominance of the Left is surprising in a sense when you consider that they select negatively for competence. As covered in the Biological Leninism essay, competent people cannot be relied on by the party of the Left, because competent people have the option to leave and succeed on their merits. The most dependent people are those who naturally have low social status.

But the Left is dominant. The general acceptance of human equality is a big factor in that: one person, one vote. You wouldn't be able to convince people in any Western country that some people deserve more political influence than others, and that some should possibly not have a vote, and others should have two or three, or more. Even though democracy is not the perfect system, I think it is one we will be stuck with as I don't see people tossing aside their value of equality any time soon.

So ultimately the battle between ideologies (meritocracy vs equity/free-status-elevation-for-the-undeserving) comes down to votes. The army on each side is an army of voters. In a real war, recruiting soldiers is a crucial step in winning. This is where the Left is killing the Right.

The main problem for the Right is that by selecting for competence, they are siding with the 20 in the natural 80/20 split. Some of the 80 who believe they are part of the 20 or could be part of the 20 or feel connected to the 20 may side with the Right... but the Right is not doing enough to attract soldiers. The Left promises status to those without status. What does the Right promise?

Principles. How many people are attracted to a party because of principles?? In the US you have a lot of young people can't do basic math, have no skills, are addicted to junk food and pornography... how are you going to attract these people with principles?

I think the dilemma for any successful political party in a degenerate society is between offering free status and offering free stuff. Yes, the Left offers free stuff, but they don't really deliver. They usually take whatever they can for themselves and a few crumbs make their way to the people who "need" them. The other problem is the Left ruins economies, which is where the free stuff would have to come from. Of course the party of the Right can be bad in these ways also, but that is a party thing and not an ideology thing. Ideologically the Right is for meritocracy and competence.

The solution for a successful Right wing party, to gain power through democratic means, is to buy soldiers--just like might be necessary in a real war. Leveraging a much higher level of competence at managing both the government and economy, promising cash to those who might otherwise be offered status from the Left, the Right could actually succeed. This is my conclusion after all the black-pilled dissecting of Leftist strategy/nature.

On 7/15/2020 at 2:00 PM, Brant Gaede said:

Power is harnessed energy, but no one has yet explained what energy is at its most basic level.

--Brant

In terms of physics, energy is simply the ability to do work.  Work is force acting through a distance.  Power is energy per unit of time.

How about a more philosophical approach?

Power is the effect of one existent making other shit to move or resist moving.

Michael

8 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Power is the effect of one existent making other shit to move or resist moving.

I am partial to "power outlets." Much of what I have is powered by electricity. joke. I heard California is going to mandate / force people to only use electrically powered automobiles. What could go wrong with that besides the upsurge in authoritarianism  and force? Some are worried about the failure of the power grid. What if it is hot in California? People might get into their electrical vehicles to run the air conditioning . . . and what could go wrong with that?  OH. And they are raising entry level job pay in Californica to 22 dollars an hour and what could go wrong with that?   

Peter,

There is plenty of money.

There is plenty of electrical power.

There is plenty of oil and gas.

California reminds me of an old joke they told in Brazil.

One person is talking to an angel. They were talking about each country and the different problems each country was having. One was a desert, another was snow-covered, another had constant earthquakes, another had tornadoes, another had tidal waves, and so on.

Then they got talking about Brazil, which is not plagued by any of those things. The person asked the angel, "Why was God so unfair to give all that goodness to Brazil an deny it to other countries?

The angel replied, "Just take a look at the people He put there."

That, to me, is California.

The Garden of Eden full of Californians.

What could possibly go wrong?

Michael

10 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The Garden of Eden full of Californians.

I think I have mentioned this before, but I loved California when I was five and in kindergarten, but my love went down from there. I still bet San Diego is populated by good people.  

Every time I see a republican house or senate member interviewed about the IRS funding , no one mentions the possibility of crafting legislation to uh..undo that. Is it a fiat accompli ? It seems more like a resigned acquiescence, approved funding becomes metaphysical?

That’ s not how I remember what that singing and dancing paper bill used to say on Saturdays.