Dglgmut

Members
  • Posts

    1,500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Dglgmut

  1. The argument that I have heard from Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai is that some of the mRNA will inevitably remain outside of the cells, and we do not know what effects that can have. We also do not know how mRNA interacts with other RNA in the cell. Apparently little is known about the genome except its role in protein production (creating mRNA), which accounts for 2% of what it does. If you think the virus could be a serious problem for you, then a vaccine is probably a good idea. But if you are healthy I feel the vaccine is more of a risk with how little we currently know.
  2. I like the comparison Stephen makes between experience and memory of experience, because that is what I focus on when thinking of the basis of knowledge. You know you're experiencing in the moment, but how do you know your experience from just two minutes ago is accurate? But before considering the validity of the memory we must consider why the knowledge of our experience in the moment is true. We are experiencing, but how do we know we are experiencing? Those are different things. To know means to conceive of consciously what is real. To know we are experiencing means more than just experiencing, it also means to have some concept of experience. The concept of experience implies a subject and an object. Do our senses tell us we exist? No, that is our mind. Therefore even our knowledge of our own experience, or own existence, depends on abstraction. This abstraction contextualizes our experience and gives us a new dimension to measure truth vs falseness in the form of contradictions. How do we know our memories are accurate? We cannot measure their accuracy perfectly. We cannot measure anything perfectly (infinite precision). But obviously we can measure them. A memory of me sitting down in my office chain is measurably more true than a memory of me teleporting into the chair. Again, the measurement is based on congruity vs contradiction. It is because we live in a conceptual world and not just a world of sensory data that we can compare the validity of these two memories; and this is true for interpretations, stories, and abstractions of all kinds.
  3. What does truth even mean in the context of your last sentence? If you say we cannot know if an abstraction is true, for example, while the truth itself is an abstraction, you're going in circles. The 'truth' depends on consciousness, and the accordance of the contents of which with reality. Your question is basically: We can know, but how can we know we know? This is a contradiction. If we can't know we know, then we can't know. And though we can think we know something we do not, that doesn't mean that everything we think we know is false.
  4. What is the difference between the Universe and nature? How does the premise of a benevolent Universe coincide with the premise of a cruel nature? I find it hard to answer this without inferring different intentions behind the terms. Perhaps in the context Rand would say that nature is cruel, 'nature' would not include the individual, but only the individual's natural environment. While presuming a benevolent Universe includes man's mind and spirit, and thus includes the tools to deal with and overcome a cruel nature. That feels like rationalizing, though.
  5. I think there's a lot more roadblocks than Trump, he's just the most prominent. Ted Cruz is definitely someone fight the technocrats, and I'm sure there's a good number of republicans who are also contributing. The election was a success for republicans other than the presidency, that's why I say I don't think Biden and Kamala will get much done. It doesn't really matter though, the right will not accept Biden as president so we will not really see what it would be like--not for the USA as it is now.
  6. Those compilations have been being put together for about 15 years now (I've seen 4 or 5 different ones, myself). I don't understand how it doesn't make a difference. How do people still watch News???
  7. I don't know about a major shift in control if Biden were President; I feel like he would be largely ineffective at doing anything, and Kamala even more-so, being unelected. However the idea of a President blatantly stealing the election sets an unacceptable precedent. I see this being the main reason he cannot be elected if there is substantial legal evidence.
  8. There is going to be a conflict either way. If Trump is sworn in the far left will be violent, of course, and the right will not, except in some self-defensish situations. If Biden is officially selected, there will not be violence from the right, except perhaps a terror attack. Either way I see a legal resolution being sought. I think the country will have to break up. It is too easy to do that when compared to the alternative.
  9. That Liz Sly woman sounds wonderful... These people are psychotic. I feel like they take "he was lied to by officials" and turn it into "He doesn't know what the hell is going on!"
  10. I don't know where to post this, but this is an amazing meeting of minds (live now): EDIT from MSK: The YouTube Gods are having trouble coping with dissent, so they removed the video. Didn't those assholes realize I had not finished watching it? No problem: TIMCAST IRL - ALEX JONES TALKS LOCKDOWNS, THE ELECTION WITH TIM POOL AND MICHAEL MALICE
  11. Uh... wtf?? Does anyone say her name in the video? I only found a part where someone calls her "Miss Secretary of State." That lady doesn't look, sound, or speak like Hillary. Weird video.
  12. That reddit is full of leftists. It's likely all fake posts. Also, right wing people don't even use reddit.
  13. Yeah, that's what I meant with my alternative at the bottom of that post (the middle class white women who Trump lost). However that doesn't make sense either, if in fact the skewed makeup of the count is due to an excess of ballots with ONLY a vote for President. If there is 450,000 ballots with only a vote for Biden that is very strange.
  14. I thought it was suspicious that Rupublicans were getting more votes except when it came to the President. Why would someone vote for a Democrat President but leave the rest of the ballot blank?? Even as fraud it seems lazy... but I guess that's how the Dems work? They make their schemes obvious enough that you can gaslight common sense people by calling them a conspiracy theorist. (Do they just want division?) Alternatively I did hear that while Trump picked up votes from minorities (mainly black and Latino men), he lost a lot of middle class women. That would explain the down-ballot Republican voting plus Biden.
  15. Here's an excerpt from Curtis Yarvin's latest post, on the election: Obviously he does not see Trump getting a second term. He is pro-Trump, in a sense, despite the tone of this passage. His problem is with the modern Right in general and their unwillingness to take power from the Left. His advice to the President would be to declassify everything that would not harm national security before his term is up, and bring all the troops home so Biden would have to initiate all foreign intervention himself. Sounds like a good plan to me. One positive thing that will come from Biden being officially elected is the title of The Underdogs will be undisputed. This will lower political energy of the Left, and make the Right take their enemies more seriously.
  16. I think they only planned to have as many fraudulent votes counted/counting mistakes as necessary. As Trump began to have a scary lead in key states, the shenanigans would proceed. But with Trump getting, what, 8 million more votes than 2016, that's a lot of fake votes/clerical errors. On that scale I can't imagine the quality of cheating is up to par and I feel like it will be hard to keep covered up.
  17. lol now I see Georgia and Pennsylvania are now showing Biden leading... By the end of the 'counting,' Biden is going to have 400+ electoral votes.
  18. The Reuters map I've been checking every so often now has Arizona as a Democrat "lead," rather than a "win".
  19. If the electoral map stays the way it is now, Trump still lost AZ and WI compared to 2016.
  20. Joe Rogan's live stream is about to start I think, and Jones is supposed to be there.
  21. Don't know if it's just me, but twitter links are not showing up as embedded. It's naked html and the link doesn't work unless I open it in a new tab.
  22. I don't think that 8% black vote is accurate. Here is a history of black voting: 11% in 2004 as a response to 9/11, presumably, and Bush's pro-war stance. 4% and 6% against the first black president, and 8% for Trump in 2016. Since Trump's win I can only imagine black support for the president is up. It's hard to qualify that, but it's probably easier to put it in terms of loyalty to the Democrats being down. It's not so much that Trump has been great, but that the overwhelming Democrat support isn't sustainable when it hasn't come with any noticeable benefits to black people.