"Your thoughts and words are violence, and I should be able to react proactively with actual violence in response." - The Left

"Your picture conveys an idea that is unacceptable in a public forum and so we are going to ban you." -Also The Left

Thu Jun 17 2021 08:38:58 MST from TheDave

 

Thu Jun 17 2021 07:34:37 MST from ParanoidDelusions <paranoiddelusions@wallofhate.com>

Jesus... The Left isn't even really trying to hide it, are they? 

 

No, and they haven't been for quite a while now.  Fuck em.  If they're willing to say they want to kill white dudes, I should get to give them a helicopter ride.

 

I'm not saying someone should bomb facebook, I'm just saying I won't be surprised when someone eventually does.

By their own logic it would be reasonable self defense.

Checked your logic with the logicians toolbox - it checks out. 

Fri Jun 18 2021 03:41:14 MST from TheDave

By their own logic it would be reasonable self defense.

John McAfee found dead in Spanish prison cell | Washington Examiner

Looks like McAfee is actually dead, this time. 

Another "Suicide". 

Elaborate, please. 

Sat Jul 03 2021 00:36:48 MST from ASCII Express

Apparently he had a tattoo and a kill switch.

That second post is already deleted. I already know people with left leaning sympathies who are claiming the whole idea that McAfee killed himself is Right Wing Q-Anon conspiracy theorist tin-foil-hattery. 

Blue pills fight hard to stay blue pilled. 

Mon Jul 12 2021 17:03:36 MST from ASCII Express

He had a tattoo that said "whackd"
https://www.the-sun.com/news/3145281/john-mcafee-suicide-whackd-tattoo-didnt-k
ill-himself-tweet/
And shortly after hisdeath, his Instigram had a post with the letter Q.


https://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-instagram-deleted-following-q-post -after-death-2021-6?op=1

There is an interesting video at:

Mass Psychosis - How an Entire Population becomes Mentally Ill

They discuss the psychotic break and why the mind experiences it, and how - and how an entire village, city, country, nation or planet can experience it simultaneously.

Gee, PD, your cautionary tale makes me even happier that I stopped experimenting at pot, back when I was youngl I almost dropped out of high school because I was bored, but one of the vice principals at Hiram w. Johnson high convinced me to hang in there for that last month to get my diploma, not only because it would be hard to get a decent job without a diploma, but that I had aced the school's I.Q. test with a149, which was the max I.Q. the test measured, and I probably had a much higher I.Q. Doubtless I would not have responded well to LSD, the only drug that interested me. I didn't even indulge in pot very often. Primarily with one friend, who provided it for free. I preferred getting high on reading Science Fiction or watching Science and Technology films.

Very intellectual people are highly attracted to novel experiences - and psychedelics are prime among them. 

The problem is, we're the most likely to over-think the experience. They're really best suited to relatively average people who don't analyze their world very much. 

Thu Aug 26 2021 18:33:23 MST from Jerry Moore

Gee, PD, your cautionary tale makes me even happier that I stopped experimenting at pot, back when I was youngl I almost dropped out of high school because I was bored, but one of the vice principals at Hiram w. Johnson high convinced me to hang in there for that last month to get my diploma, not only because it would be hard to get a decent job without a diploma, but that I had aced the school's I.Q. test with a149, which was the max I.Q. the test measured, and I probably had a much higher I.Q. Doubtless I would not have responded well to LSD, the only drug that interested me. I didn't even indulge in pot very often. Primarily with one friend, who provided it for free. I preferred getting high on reading Science Fiction or watching Science and Technology films.

https://phys.org/news/2021-10-ocean-life-clouds-bay.html?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email

If your models are wrong - your science isn't *settled* and *irrefutable*. 

"Marine plankton breathe more than 20 million tons of sulfur into the air every year, mostly in the form of dimethyl sulfide (DMS). In the air, this chemical can transform into sulfuric acid, which helps produce clouds by giving a site for water droplets to form. Over the scale of the world's oceans, this process affects the entire climate.

But new research from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and others reveals that more than one-third of the DMS emitted from the sea can never help new clouds form because it is lost to the clouds themselves. The new findings significantly alter the prevailing understanding of how marine life influences clouds and may change the way scientists predict how cloud formation responds to changes in the oceans."

Tue Oct 12 2021 08:56:29 MST from ParanoidDelusions <paranoiddelusions@wallofhate.com>

If your models are wrong - your science isn't *settled* and *irrefutable*. 

 

They've never had a fucking clue what they're doing and it's obvious to anyone who pays attention, but most people are happy to check an app for the weather instead of look outside.

Arguing with someone on Reddit right now who insists if we don't adopt solar we're all going to be dead in 50 years. Literally, this is the line in the sand they drew - and when I debated it - they called *me* the "science denier". 

We live in clown world. 

Fri Oct 15 2021 11:21:25 MST from TheDave

 

Tue Oct 12 2021 08:56:29 MST from ParanoidDelusions <paranoiddelusions@wallofhate.com>

If your models are wrong - your science isn't *settled* and *irrefutable*. 

 

They've never had a fucking clue what they're doing and it's obvious to anyone who pays attention, but most people are happy to check an app for the weather instead of look outside.

You should read "Apocalypse Never", it's written bby a former lefty journalist who realized that the climate panic was nonsense and goes in depth on all of it, offering real solutions if people want to improve the environment.  It's really very interesting.

I believe I've been recommended this before. It sounds interesting. 

I think limiting pollution and decreasing our contribution to greenhouse gasses is generally a good idea. There is no way that there can be 7 billion of us - being so much *different* in how we impact the ecosystem than other animals, and not have an impact. No other animals really harvest wood to burn, mine for coal and oil, or otherwise PRODUCE like we produce. Not termites, not beavers, not primates. We're unique. It is silly to act like that doesn't make us a unique challenge for the ecosystem. 

But - it is such a polarized, politicized topic with a clear agenda that has nothing to do with AGCC behind it - just consolidation of industry and political power. 

Fri Oct 29 2021 02:49:09 MST from TheDave

You should read "Apocalypse Never", it's written bby a former lefty journalist who realized that the climate panic was nonsense and goes in depth on all of it, offering real solutions if people want to improve the environment.  It's really very interesting.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/joe-rogan-breaks-silence-after-neil-young-controversy


So, I'm not a huge fan of Rogan. He is not an incredible critical thinker. He is a lot like Henry Rollins in that he seems to think he takes pride in being a simple, common-sense sort of guy, but he also entertains the idea that he has the intellectual capacity to understand guys like Jordan Peterson. Because of this, he frequently seems transparently wishy-washy to me. You'll see it in an interview where he is trying to talk up to someone like Bret Weinstein, Peterson, or Musk and they've said something where he is just missing their point by 180 degrees. They'll correct him, and he will assert something like, "I see what you mean, I agree with you... that is exactly what I'm saying..." but it isn't. Eventually he usually tries to just move it along and leave that unaddressed, or he simply admits they're right - but you can often see it in his face, his tone, his attitude, that he just doesn't get it and is instead agreeing to avoid a confrontation with the person. He is very agreeable - but not necessarily because of comprehension of what he isn't understanding. Instead, he agrees for the sake of avoiding confrontation. 

In most cases, it is just frustrating - and it is a frequent risk for moderates who score high on agreeability and want to be open minded. It is probably a sign of high emotional intelligence. It is also why a lot of moderates get accused of waffling, playing both sides of the field, and being unreliable and inconsistent. They tend to be easily swayed by persuasive argument and often do not critically analyze beyond the immediate question at hand. 

I'm afraid Rogan is guilty of that here in particular in attempting to be conciliatory and offering to provide "alternative viewpoint" rebuttals on his show. 

If others disagree with him, it is their responsibility to find a platform to reach audiences with that message. It isn't his obligation to provide anyone equal time. A broadcaster traditionally was required to do so - and it couldn't hurt Spotify to diversify their audience reach by offering a spectrum of opinions in their available podcasts. In fact - that is when media was reputable and respected - when they didn't have a clear and significant partisan lean but instead took the idea of Freedom of Speech and of the Press to heart as a responsibility to cover all opinions and perspectives. 

What he is doing here by trying to understand, dialog and compromise with his opposition is dangerous. Neil Young is no more qualified to express an opinion on Covid or vaccines than Rogan is. Young is probably barely literate, like Carlos Santana and tons of other musicians from this era of rock and roll. 

But what Young and other artists are doing is trying to de-platform Rogan and take away his voice. They want to silence someone they disagree with, who is saying things that they believe are dangerous... 
 

The *same* kind of behavior that they accused the establishment of applying to Rock in the 60s. This isn't the disenfranchised voice of angry youth speaking out about injustice and inequity and unpopular war - it is the old and financially comfortable being threatened by the potential of disruption to the social status quo. Neil Young *is* The Man, and so are the Foo Fighters, and every other band that feels the need to remove Rogan's platform from him. 

One has to wonder... Hey now, woo hoo... when did Rock and Roll become uncool? 

The problem is - if Neil and his fellow artists get their way - they'll be emboldened to continue to silence voices that they simply disagree with. I'm not defending Rogan or his position on Vaccines - but I'm certainly defending his right to broadcast his opinions, however controversial they are. Crosby, Stills Nash and Young had LOTS of controversial ideas they published - and anyone trying to silence their voices when they were relevant to society was in the wrong. The Rock Stars are now the PMRC - but they don't just want to tell your KIDS what they can listen to. They want to tell EVERYONE what they can listen to. 

And certainly, Young is even worse for his hypocrisy as an old man, trying to do to others what he felt was injustice when it was done to him when he was young. 

Fuck that old hippy. Hopefully he joins the increasing list of past-their-prime former-glory rock stars reverting back to dust in the Earth soon. How did we lose Zeppa but we managed to keep this old, shrill scarecrow? The universe is unfair. 

 

 

Don't trust the Western Media: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ2glZtYEwk&t=107s

But maybe Russell Brand agreeing with me will help convince people:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=595Esg6Mz0U