Teaching Satyr Evolution

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

reasonvemotion
Posts: 1643
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by reasonvemotion »

'However, there is a danger in the word God as Aristotle and Seneca wrote;

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. (Aristotle)

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. (Seneca the younger)

The church has caused immense harm to humanity.

Cicero and Tolstoy state the importance of reason in religion;

.. as a philosopher, I have a right to ask for a rational explanation of religious faith. (Cicero)

True religion is that relationship, in accordance with reason and knowledge, which man establishes with the infinite world around him, and which binds his life to that infinity and guides his actions .. and leads to the practical rules of the law: do to others as you would have them do unto you. ...
Reason is the power man possesses to define his relationship to the universe. Since the relationship is the same for everyone, thus religion unites men. Union among men gives them the highest attainable well-being, on both the physical and the spiritual level.
(Leo Tolstoy, Confessions, 1882)

Use reason combined with knowledge from our senses to deduce what exists.

For there is a single general space, a single vast immensity which we may freely call Void; in it are innumerable globes like this one on which we live and grow. This space we declare to be infinite, since neither reason, convenience, possibility, sense-perception nor nature assign to it a limit. In it are an infinity of worlds of the same kind as our own. (Giordano Bruno)
User avatar
Kuznetzova
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Kuznetzova »

Satyr wrote:Will not anyone with a wall full of credentials not teach me a lesson?
:(

Come on....someone....anyone?
:oops:

Okay...can anyone with a closet full of black-belts and a chest full of Dans not send me money so that I can visit them and be beaten up?
:?:

I NEED to be taught a severe and brutal lesson....please!!!
:x
I'm dumb, ignorant and uneducated...so this should be easy.
Kuznetzova wrote:I have called this principle, whereby each slight variation, if useful, is preserved by the term Natural Selection.
Satyr wrote:A pedophile would say so.
Image
.
.

You were right. That was easy.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

Pedophile....

"I have called this principle by which each slight variation, if useful, by the term of Natural Selection."
Last edited by Satyr on Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

reasonvemotion wrote:Learn to know thyself! He who has understood himself has understood God
(The Prophet Muhammad ) from the Quran.

The essence of any religion lies solely in the answer to the question: why do I exist, and what is my relationship to the infinite universe that surrounds me? ... It is impossible for there to be a person with no religion (i.e. without any kind of relationship to the world) as it is for there to be a person without a heart. He may not know that he has a religion, just as a person may not know that he has a heart, but it is no more possible for a person to exist without a religion than without a heart.
(Leo Tolstoy, 1879)

For God is thought to be among the causes for all things and to be a kind of principle ... (Aristotle)

Except God no substance can be granted or conceived. ... Hence it distinctly follows that God is one alone, ... in the nature of things only one substance can be granted, and that is absolutely infinite. ... extended substance is one of the infinite attributes of God ... God and all the attributes of God are eternal. (Spinoza, 1673)

Nature is none other than God in things... Animals and plants are living effects of Nature; Whence all of God is in all things. ... All things are in the Universe, and the universe is in all things: we in it, and it in us; in this way everything concurs in a perfect unity. ... Before anything else the One must exist eternally; from his power derives everything that always is or will ever be. (Giordano Bruno, 1585)

God alone is the primary Unity, or original simple substance, from which all monads, created and derived, are produced. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)

When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence: Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter. ...
Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. (Albert Einstein)

"A careful analysis of the process of observation in atomic physics has shown that the subatomic particles have no meaning as isolated entities, but can only be understood as interconnections between the preparation of an experiment and the subsequent measurement. Quantum theory thus reveals a basic oneness of the universe. It shows that we cannot decompose the world into independently existing smallest units. As we penetrate into matter, nature does not show us any isolated ‘basic building blocks’, but rather appears as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of the whole." (Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics, On Quantum Theory)
Most of the quotes are from Judeo-Christians, my dear.
The last only states that there is no God, no absolute, but only a process. "Relationships" are (inter)actions.

The quote I offered states that all thinking, or most of it, is now infected with Platonism....the way the mind thinks now evidence of reality outside its thinking.

There is no thing, and all the linguistic terms that imply the underlying premise of a static absolute, if taken literally, lead to the disaster of morons replacing words for reality.
there are only processes that exhibit patterns. these patterns are not eternal for they too are fragmenting, changing, and so reality is in constant Flux.
But these patterns, in relation to human lifespans, do exhibit a consistency within temporal/spatial parameters that make life and consciousness possible.

Here are some examples of such terms: thing, here, now, order, one, god, whole etc.
These are human abstractions:simplifications/generalizations of a fluid world into static models.

These are constructed by cutting away the phenomenon, from the world, this is what simplification means. This selective cutting away fabricates ambiguous boundaries so as to enable the conceptualization of the phenomenon as a thing. It is how consciousness works and should not be mistaken for the world it is trying to make sense of.

When I say "tree" I am using a symbol to define a process which cannot be defined by a static term. The real tree is changing, so by the time you say "tree" you are talking about a variant of the original you became aware of.
All language is a symbolization of mental abstractions...with math being the highest form of this.
Math is based on binary logic...1 (thing) and its negation 0 (no-thing)...this is dualism. In fact reality is the fluctuating in-between the two absolutes. The concepts of 1-0 are boundaries symbols to construct a mental grid so as to direct the Will. It is a method.
1+1=2 is logical only if you accept the starting premises as a given: 1/0.
Within this presumption does the logic of mathematics hold true. Outside of it it leads to paradoxes and to failure if taken literally and not as figurative methods.
There is no 1 or 0 outside human constructs...and so all human constructs based no it must be repaired, maintained...they are not eternal for the binary logic they are based no is a method freezing a fluid reality.

To take either as real outside human abstractions is an error.
There is no 1 and no 0 outside the human brain that requires them so as to make sense of the world.
This is why when man takes these terms literally he falls into paradoxes: infinite-divisibility being one of them.
Paradoxes are entirely the result of taking words, symbolizing mental abstractions, as anything but artistic forms of conceptualizing reality by freezing it into static forms.
It is like painting a tree and then mistakenly considering your painting as the actual phenomenon. A phenomenon is constantly changing, (inter)acting, and so it is never the same...it is not a static thing but a dynamic process.
Phenomenon means: that which appears. That which appears is appearance through and through.
I (inter)act with it via an intervening medium. My sense organ (eye) interacts with light which has (inter)acted with the phenomenon which has already changed by the time I process the information and abstract them and construct a mental model.

The term "whole" is also a human construct as it implies a border, an outline, an outside/inside...and a completion.
It places a temporal/spatial border around a world that has none.
It offers a fantastic conception of "all" from a vantage point beyond it; as if you were a God existing in non-existence surveying reality totally (omniscience).
It is a fantastic projection of the mind outside its own abstractions.
There is no outside existence, for this is a mistake based on human binary logic.
It also represents a contradiction to experience.

There is no wholeness and no oneness outside the human brain that must conceptualize in absolutes.

It is the brain which is an ordering tool. In a world of increasing chaos, the mind (re)acts by ordering. this is what makes the male spirit valuable.
Masculinity represents an ordering principle: ORDER (Apollo).
Feminine represents an abandonment to the status quo, the increasing chaos...it is at heart conservative, though in modern times it has been defined as progressive.
One need not preserve change, sweetie, for it happens naturally (nature always anthropomorphized as feminine); one need only preserve order, non-change (static). This is the revolutionary method of towards order...towards absolute order represented by a masculine Deity.
We must take care not to misconstrue man's method of conceptualizing for the reality being conceptualized.
This is counter-intuitive because it questions man's methods of intuiting.
This is what Plato meant by using man's natural proclivities to offer him dualistic good/bag models so as to enable the existence of a stable city-state.

We see here how with nihilism the concepts have been turned on their heads.
Those proposing the abandonment to the status quo, to chaos, to change, are called "progressive" when they are conservatives. they wish to conserve what is occurring with no effort: the ongoing fragmentation.
They project this as a towards absolute emptiness, a total immersion in the Buddhist void where they imagine it as a return to the "source".
This is what I call "positive" nihilism. A self-denying, world-denouncing, psychology which imagines the end result as a merging with a "higher" consciousness or a "higher" state of Being.
Here fragmentation leads to a Higher Order...a contradiction. Total uniformity is imagined as a relief from the constant turmoil (inter)activity, and uncertainty and suffering of existence.
Death as a relief from life.
The sensation of need/suffering, is, in fact, the sensation of (inter)acting, in other words of existing.
Those promoting the fantasy of an end to suffering are really promoting an end to life...for instead of strengthening themselves to endure (inter)activity they hope for a total absolution.
Suffering being a need reaching an intolerable level.

Cosmology is also based on binary logic:
The Big Bang is the closest point to an absolute, singularity...it always lies in the past.
When we speak of the past we speak of a more ordered state; when we speak of the future we speak of a less ordered state.
It, the past, is immutable because the past cannot be intervened upon; it is determining because the present is a manifestation of the past....ergo we get the conceptualization of an immutable, creator, God.
The Big Bang is a scientific conception of a Deity or of Masculine nihilism. For here too if the approach to the absolute order is completed then all existence ceases...therefore the Big Bang is not a singular event, but an ongoing process, receding into the temporal-spatial distance.

On the other end of this dualistic model we have increasing chaos, fragmentation. Chaos is a term denoting a state where the mind cannot find patterns within: randomness.
In an absolute form randomness would make life impossible and consciousness even more so impossible, for there would be no pattern (genes are an encoded pattern created in and reflecting the past).
Chaos requires no energy, no effort to come about...it happens.
I will not get into how or why at this point.
It is only ordering (thinking, acting, knowing, living) which requires effort.
Ergo the feminine ideal of chaos, of embracing change, is a nihilistic one. This is feminine nihilism.

Masculine Nihilism: absolute, complete Order = God.
Feminine Nihilism: absolute, complete, Disorder = Emptiness/Void.

The feminine is attracted to order, and order wants to impose itself upon disorder.
The feminine is attracted to order as an ideal....the masculine is attracted to the feminine as a possibility.
Here we get the basic sexual dichotomies.
In the case of chaos the feminine surrenders to the most stronger tendency, for no matter how much order resists entropy is always increasing.
The feminine is only attracted to another power if it promises, inspires, her...Apollo's appeal is always illusionary and temporary.
This is why sexual attraction is always based on a hyperbole and a lie.
A male exaggerates his power; a female eventually becomes disillusioned with him and laughs at his drive toward power - Will to Power.

If there is no evidence of a one, a whole, anywhere in nature then to assume it as the foundation of it all is the same as the concept of "god".
You might find that the absence of a particle only contradicts oneness. Even the theoretical model of String-Theory uses a "string" which vibrates...but there is no string, there is only vibration. If we take away the vibration there is no-thing.

There are even models where there are multiverses, cosmological membranes interacting, and not a uni-verse.
The concept of a uni-verse a whole is a human projection.

I am a bottom>up thinker not a top>down thinker.
I do not begin with a construct and then try to justify it with the given. I start with the given and I try to work upwards.

Of course ignorance is always present as nothing is ever absolute and so awareness is never complete.
Like Wittgenstein I try not to pass over in silence what is nonsensical. But from a sociological point of view I am forced to study myths and socially popular lies.

The top>down thinking offers a comforting delusion: it begins with a certainty and then works backwards. Such minds already know, they are already aware, and must only discover what they know and what they are aware of. They have the solution but must work through a rational way of getting there. They always fail, because they presume, they are presumptuous, and so they resort to lies and to selective reasoning and schizophrenic mind-sets. There is no harmony in their mind, no order, no symmetry in their thinking because this would expose their errors. Their goal is already given and it is comforting and decided...a self-serving projection.

This might be considered dangerous knowledge for not all can bear it.
Tolstoy's assertion only proves that man must have an ideal...but no two ideals are the same nor do they result in the same type of man.
An Ideal is another term for the perfect, the absolute, the one, the God.
It guides it cannot, and should not, be attained.
The ideal inspires, and it identifies those that strive towards it.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

Satyr's Message

Human consciousness, evolved with an on-off mechanism: on being a bio-energy pulse flowing through a neural cluster, and off being no bio-energy flowing through it.

From this life, as we know it, evolves a binary dualism which can take many forms: good/bad....good/evil....friend/foe....threat/no-threat....existing/non-existing....complete/incomplete....real/unreal....I/Other, order/disorder...God/Satan...thing/nothing....and finally 1/0.
The last is the most abstract form of binary dualism.

These concepts are not useless for they offer a borderline, an outer extension of human awareness, to guide the Will.
As such, reality, the world, existence, call it whatever you like, is the condition encompassed by these human conceptual boundaries.
These boundaries are always ambiguous for they are human constructs and also changing, for man's awareness is also altering: expanding or contracting.
They are signposts, points on a mental grid that helps orient the mind.

They are not actual, but metaphorical, symbolic, allegorical, in the sense that they cannot be found outside human conceptions, because the world is characterized by fluctuations and variations and not absolute states.

Phenomena are processes frozen, by the simplifying mind, into static things.
These patterns exhibit a predictable consistency, making them useful, but should not be considered eternal. they are also changing and so patterns only hold true within the time/space boundaries of human awareness and human lifespans.
The discovery of patterns that hold true for longer periods of time, are called universals. Minds that perceive them are called genius.
Time is the measurement of quality.
Even in Natural Selection it is the genetic unity that manages to pass on its genes, is more timeless in other words, which is considered fit.

Conceptions which are not timeless are called superficial or shallow.
They only hold true within contained environments or not for very long.
What is a superficial perception is one that bases its conclusions on a temporally shallow event horizon.
This is also what is called immediate gratification or spontaneity or living in the present.
All these states are ones we associate with animal, base, living.
Dogs are spontaneous, they are instinctive, seeking only immediate rewards and live in the moment....a goldfish has a memory of 6 seconds - it is one creature that lives more in the present in comparison to man.
The restriction of awareness entails a diminished of one's memory...they call it releasing baggage. It is a dumbing-down, a return to a base existence.
Such minds are easily manipulated and controlled...they are essentially animals in the worse sense of the word.

True, being more aware entails more suffering, more stress, there are more variables to consider, more possibilities one should take account of....and being a moron is a relief, as ignorance is bliss...and so the choice is yours.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

BrainWashing

1 Gender
2 Parental Effect
3 Gay/Straight
4 Violence
5 Sex
6 Race
7 Nature vs. Nurture


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some conflict on the YouTube community regarding Evolution Theory.

Realists vs. Liberal Twats

EvoGen here is the Liberal Twat.

Heritability

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liberal Twat versus Scientists
You know which side you belong to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think some of the more vocal liberal retards on this forum will recognize themselves in this polemic.
Why egalitarians Lie...so MUCH!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Egalitarian Tactics (War on Common Sense)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Race and I.Q. - Egalitarianism Destroyed (LebertarianRealist vs. EvoGen) ...or Realist versus Liberal Twat.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Lynn explains Eugenics and Dysgenics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. William Shockley on Race, I.Q., and Eugenics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hans Eysenck on Race and I.Q.

1
2


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Satyr on Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:33 am, edited 6 times in total.
Atthet
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:53 am

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Atthet »

Satyr wrote:I think some of the more vocal liberal retard on this forum will recognize themselves in this polemic.
Why egalitarians Lie...so MUCH!

This reminds me of one of the times, a liberal nitwit accused me of "saying correct things," but, "saying them in the wrong way or wrong tone". fringeelements is able to counter most of the emotional nitwits, and preemptively addresses their attacks. One important point is the political implications and consequences of his videos. As a realist, the liberal paradigm, and secular humanists, are going to "hate" fringeelements videos, and accuse him of "hating". The emotionally stunted need to hang onto their delusions, their hallucinations, at all cost.
What is the alternative? Free thinking, that is too scary, too dangerous, to the average moron.
Atthet
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:53 am

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Atthet »

Dog Breeds
The Egalitarians avoid the existence of dogs, to connect genetics to the general category of canine. If we accept that dogs are bred, by humans, in a controlled environment, and this breeding of dogs results in accentuated differences in diverse areas of behavior, superficial appearance beauty, and intelligence, then how is dog breeding disconnected to the breeding of humans, and human races?

In fact, much of Greek philosophy, Hellenism, and Roman civilization, was established by selective breeding of humans, resulting in aristocratic classes, royalty, and monarchy. The early Roman Catholic Church and its dogmas controlled much of this breeding, by arranging marriages, between nobility, and instructing diverse groups of people to mate with other groups of people. The result of this, eventually, came to be known as "slavery", opposed to a master class of human being. The slave classes were bred specifically for mundane labor, for low intelligence, and for warfare. Warrior classes were also selectively bred, eventually appearing in american football. Humans are bred for specific tasks, if not now, then for thousands of years previously, leading up to now.
Egalitarians seek to destroy the past, in order to promote a liberal agenda. A football player has "equal opportunity" to become "anything he or she wants" as an adult, in life. This is creating dramatic and exponential problems for civilizations, across the world. The egalitarian premise, obviously false, must deny nature, and spend an extraordinary amount of resources keep the slave classes of humanity, enslaved.

If you hesitate, and withdraw from preaching the Egalitarian, Judeo-Christian lies, to children, then children will reject the possibility of equality, and accept the past, and what the past entails.
Ancestry, hierarchy, superior of some humans over others, breeding of humans, human selectively bred for specific tasks, slavery, mastery, genetic isolation, discrimination, racism, exclusion of some groups to others, segregation, and finally, the rise of a nobility class, a class of human beings vastly superior in intellect, beauty, body size, strength, and all forms of positive attributes. The hereditarian premise, nature, will overrule nurture, by force.

Western civilization, the Judeo-Christian dogma and poison of society, must spend billions and trillions of dollars each year, on constantly enslaving and "reeducating" people. With a falling economy, resources must diminish in spreading these lies. Democratic election campaigns, to the public education systems, once a vast reduction of spending occurs, due to bankruptcy, people will retreat to more "racist" views, collapse and selectively segregate, reject the dogmas, and Egalitarianism will become exposed for the lie it is. And this systemic lie, requires massive funding, to upkeep. Mountains of dollars and gold are required to keep the masses sedated, and stupid, to prevent such internal segregation in society from forming.
Egalitarianism is specifically, anti-elitism.
User avatar
Kuznetzova
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Kuznetzova »

Satyr wrote: Masculine Nihilism: absolute, complete Order = God.
Feminine Nihilism: absolute, complete, Disorder = Emptiness/Void.

The feminine is attracted to order, and order wants to impose itself upon disorder.
The feminine is attracted to order as an ideal....the masculine is attracted to the feminine as a possibility.
Here we get the basic sexual dichotomies.
In the case of chaos the feminine surrenders to the most stronger tendency, for no matter how much order resists entropy is always increasing.
The feminine is only attracted to another power if it promises, inspires, her...Apollo's appeal is always illusionary and temporary.
This is why sexual attraction is always based on a hyperbole and a lie.
Image
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

BrainWashing

1 Gender
2 Parental Effect
3 Gay/Straight
4 Violence
5 Sex
6 Race
7 Nature vs. Nurture


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich wrote:• It is not our concern to become acquainted with the land occupied by nations as an external locale, but with the natural type of the locality, as intimately connected with the type and character of the people which is offspring of such soil (1956:79-80).

• With respect to the diversity of races of mankind it must be remembered first of all that the purely historical question, whether all these races sprang from a single pair of human beings or from several, is of no concern whatever to us in philosophy. Importance was attached to this question because it was believed that by assuming decent from several couples, the mental and spiritual superiority of one race over another could be explained, indeed, it was hoped to prove that human beings are by nature so differently endowed with mental or spiritual capacities that some can be dominated like animals. But decent affords no ground for granting or denying freedom to human beings. Man is implicitly rational; herein lies the possibility of equal justice for all men and the futility of a rigid distinction between races which have rights and those which have none. The difference between the races of mankind is…a difference which, in the first instance, concerns the natural soul. As such, the difference is connected with the geographical differences of those parts of the world where human beings are gathered together in masses (1971:41).

Some conflict on the YouTube community regarding Evolution Theory.

Realists vs. Liberal Twats

EvoGen here is the Liberal Twat.

Heritability

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liberal Twat versus Scientists
You know which side you belong to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think some of the more vocal liberal retards on this forum will recognize themselves in this polemic.
Why egalitarians Lie...so MUCH!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Egalitarian Tactics (War on Common Sense)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Race and I.Q. - Egalitarianism Destroyed (LebertarianRealist vs. EvoGen) ...or Realist versus Liberal Twat.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Lynn explains Eugenics and Dysgenics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. William Shockley on Race, I.Q., and Eugenics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hans Eysenck on Race and I.Q.

1
2


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lunatic Fringe Episode 009 - The Way of Men

Part of the Backlash:
Men of the West...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Love the cigarette and drink effect.
A bit pretentious but aware.
Is Race Realism Racism?

Fight Club & C.S. Lewis
Lewis Vs Palahniuk Pt 2: Food Porn and Making Love
Feminism: Gender is Genetic

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One for the laaaadies out there. Especially those with a penis.

Male Disposability

The human species is funny.
I love just watching them go....and go.
Men not marrying? How deep does "the problem" go?

Fempocalypse!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How feminism was supported and Freud was "overcome"...
Century of Self

Marketing proving, with Bernays, how "complex" and "unique" the average really and truly is.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by mtmynd1 »

Well, 'sadder', seems as tho you are unable to abandon your pulpit - rambling on and on, and now not even waiting for a reply. How very boring life must be for you in your little world of suburbia.

Do you do the same preaching at your own site? Is this a cut and paste from those lectures you're giving on that site?

Please entertain us with something even a wee bit more interesting if you must dominate the board with needless dribble which becomes nothing more than white noise after seeing the repetitiveness of it all over and over and over.
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1643
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by reasonvemotion »

Satyr gave as a reference Dr Bill, who in Satyr's mind is an authority on race. Given his opinion is almost identical to the KKK I was surprised Satyr had not used them as an example of race. After further research the answer became clear. Greeks were included with the "blacks" as inferior according to the KKK.

Dr William Shockley, professor emeritus of electrical engineering at Standord.

He preached a philosophy of ''retrogressive evolution.'' Stipulating that intelligence was genetically transmitted, he deemed blacks genetically inferior to whites and unable to achieve their intellectual level. As a corollary, he suggested that blacks were reproducing faster than whites - hence, the retrogression in human evolution.

OR

Hiram Wesley Evans, one time Imperial Wizard and Emperor, of the Klu Klux Klan.


Evans used Eugenics to point out the number of "defectives, dependents, and criminals" that require the nation's care in institutions. Evans used the figures of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, a eugenics expert at this time, to point out that these burdens are in the millions. Evans blamed Laughlin's results on the flow of immigrants coming into the country. Evans said, "Insanity and crime are the worst manifestations of social inadequacy." The figures showed that insanity was higher among immigrants. Crime was higher among Negroes, Italians, Greeks and the Balkan peoples. (PP. 12-16)
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Satyr »

mtmynd1 wrote:Well, 'sadder', seems as tho you are unable to abandon your pulpit - rambling on and on, and now not even waiting for a reply. How very boring life must be for you in your little world of suburbia.

Do you do the same preaching at your own site? Is this a cut and paste from those lectures you're giving on that site?

Please entertain us with something even a wee bit more interesting if you must dominate the board with needless dribble which becomes nothing more than white noise after seeing the repetitiveness of it all over and over and over.
You know, twat, you are inspirational.

I mean, here I am amongst the most humble, selfless, normal people on the planet who do not come here to say anything or to be noticed, and do a darn good job of it by the way, and look how unappreciative I am.
If someone needs a lesson in being in a group and not standing out, then each and every one of you, with your repetition of the shared bullshit, are truly worthy of the title "master".

Sure, some lowlife might wander in here wanting to say something he thinks deserves being listened to, but not any of you douche-bags....no, no, no...you fags are much too normal and sure of yourselves to say anything interesting.
You do not need to say anything different because you have such a healthy self-esteem and are all so happy.
Some, degenerates, might say that none of you have anything to say outside the common bullshit, but I know this is not true. I just have to skim through these threads to find gems of brilliant wisdom none of them standing out or wanting to be noticed; tender, kind, loving things...things healthy, minds say to one another despite the world around them.

True, I can come here and just agree with the current shared "ideals", trying to fit-in and be happy, lowering myself as to not be heard, but here I am all arrogant standing high to be seen and listened to....because I'm needy, and sad.
But not you sheeple.
No matter how stupid your people are you've got happiness to gloat about. An honest, healthy, happiness....like a drug-induced narcosis, all smiles and giggling.

I'll step off my soap-box and like you I will whisper in the corners about my new car or my kids and how beautiful they are or name-drop and casually mention my credentials, because that's what good-natured, well-meaning, humble, happy, douche-bags do....and we all want to belong to the herd, do we not?

Thank you for showing the way toward discreet blandness and mediocre stupidity, using humility and shame to lower everyone into a white-noise of numbing musac.

If you offer me $1,000 I'll agree to call Nietzsche and Darwin a douche-bag, as well, just because they were sexist, racists and arrogant fools who actually believed their views mattered.
But, unlike you and your clan of nit-wits, they lived in another age...and that explains why your morals are so superior, and why you are all so content.

But be comforted....they were also sad, one of them went mad, whereas stupidity and ignorance is what makes you blissfully inebriated...and fun to watch jump around like an ape, trying not to get noticed.

I think you've found my button.
Press it some more.

:twisted:
User avatar
Kuznetzova
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Kuznetzova »

I think many of us suffer from getting so far ahead of the culture we are imbedded inside of (off the internet) that we feel totally isolated.

Your championing of Darwin here is peculiar, since you didn't even recognize the quote of him coining the phrase Natural Selection in chapter 3.
Your championing of Nietzsche is unfortunate. Nietzsche was a good writer, but some of his claims have turned out to be factually false.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Teaching Satyr Evolution

Post by Arising_uk »

Satyr wrote:Satyr's Message

Human consciousness, evolved with an on-off mechanism: on being a bio-energy pulse flowing through a neural cluster, and off being no bio-energy flowing through it. ...
How many times!? There is no 'off' state, there is always 'bio-energy' flowing, its that they work with threshold activations that gives the 'switch' function and they appear to be variable ones at that.
Post Reply