sb23rd

I enjoy your videos and the information you present with one criticism that your presentation is a tad on the dry side. I have to ask why you devote your time to those progressives called the young turks whose ideology is left leaning? I watched a couple of their videos way back and felt i was being emotionally manipulated. Only later i discovered modern progressivism uprooted and supplanted early liberalism with the absolute arbitrary rule of the state. They reject social Darwinism as a leftist ideology would and their rhetoric is sprinkled with sophistry, again a hallmark of the left.

Black holes, to the best of my understanding and corrections welcomed, exist only as abstractions in people's minds. Empirically, as the reading I have done suggests against its existence. Good video btw, cheers.

Apart from Josephus, is there any other contemporary sources that would cement Jesus as a historical figure? Although I haven't read this book, I've listened to the author in several interviews and his case appears strong. I admit I lack the necessary research and speak primarily from curiosity. Do you have a source for this? From my research back in the day and using my dictionary app to confirm, 'satan' merely means 'adversary' or 'one who opposes or obstructs'. In Greek it translated to 'diabolos', meaning 'slanderer'. The word essentially is indicative of a role and not a character. Accuracy, precision, correctness or what have you particularly definitions and etymology, are very important on a philosophy forum.

From a Google scholar search*, "Size distortion among patients with eating disorders appears unlikely to reflect a more generalized sensory / perceptual deficit". Published under the Department of Pyschology in 1998. There has probably been further findings that may or may not support a genetic origin. Generally speaking feminist proclamations don't bear well with reality. *http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1098-108X(199709)22:2<107::AID-EAT1>3.0.CO;2-J/abstract

Been reading Arthur C. Clarke I gather? Which proposition would you say has the least assumptions: 1. Jesus was an alien utilising advanced technology and all of its implications, or 2. creative license by various authors fusing old myths, legends and traditions eventually turned into a unified whole that supplanted paganism and gave Rome double powers of the word and the sword?

If according to Hume human knowledge or epistemological theories are a product of custom and imagination, does he not proceed to reach his conclusion by a process he claims is unknowable? Am I missing something here? Seems self detonating. Hume also states that we connect our ideas (a priori from another realm) to our impressions received via the senses. This suggests concepts do not form from sense perception (induction) of the external world. Like Descartes, this bothers me somewhat because the mind is assumed to be some sort of conduit part of the body but not really.

Another double post.

Double post.

Sometime into the future impartial parties will determine that earth's resources are nearing depletion. When that will be is unknown. Watch out for leftist traps scare mongering people into believing catastrophic environmental problems only to be a guise for more government control. I strongly believe that if or when that time dawns it will be, as throughout history, the able and heroic souls who will lead to avert extinction. If the current political system is not resolved and the world is still an irrational statist nightmare when folks realise 'ah shit what me want there none is', would be a step towards the precipice. Take history and the examples at how societies can bounce back from peril, the Romans and Camillus who was called the second founder of Rome, or the French during social and political turmoil that made heads roll daily only to face the fudal powers of Europe determined to extinguish the revolution and its gains. Governments since then have grown immensely and have at their disposal sophisticated tools of propaganda and indoctrination. We are at war in battle for man's mind, seeking victory for reason and good. As long as there people like Stefan and those who keep asking questions against opposition, those that challenge assumptions and follow their curiosity and chose to act there is still hope.

Idealism to my understanding is the view that ideas are as the same as concrete entities and thus mind over matter. The writings of Kant and Hegel come to mind. Marx was a communist who wanted to impose an artifical/abstract system onto reality. Communism also has some parallels to theology. Collectivism is subjugation of the individual to an idea and how this supposedly trumps a physical entity is beyond me.

Do not credit Stefan as the originator of said prediction but as someone following the precepts of reality and making a rational argument which has been espoused before by people of similar intellectual caliber. Apologies for the criticism it is not meant in disdain but your question is framed in a manner that suggests at Stefan's credibility. As pointed out the bursting of the bubble has been deferred to some future point. The fed being the captured or capturer institution of the state particularly since the gold standard took early retirement pretty much does what it wants. After all the fed is its own police. The lapdog media parrots along to delight of the leftist and Chicago school economist, your typical central planners.

Out of the left field indeed. To my understanding Googles deepmind is still a supervised ai meaning that a true ai as depicted on Hollywood films is yet to beat a human being.

I have a few questions. How do you know your vote reflects your convictions? If I don't vote and want to be left alone will the 'elected' comply with my wishes?

The fed is a regulated institution. The regulator (the state) has exclusive monopoly to regulate. Auditing the fed is inconsequential because it is part of the state and the regulation is done by the state. The contradictions are fairly evident.

Would appear to tie in with cybernetics and technocracy as envisioned by Zbigniew Brzezinski some decades ago. I highly recommend the tradegyandhope podcast and this specifically https://www.tragedyandhope.com/technocracy-cybernetics-richard-grove-on-declare-your-independence-with-ernest-hancock/. The control for the human animal by the parasitic class is as old as history.

I think that once a voluntary society is achieved, for a state to reemerge would be a tall order. A multi generational process of achieving a voluntary society implies the adherence to the very things that act as 'safeguards' such as the NAP, I own me and so forth against statist encroachments. The balance of the scales would be in our favor so to speak as more and more people operate from principles. There'd have to be a massive cognitive breakdown in the population to regress back to 'might is right" in whatever form it takes. /End of hypothetical.

Who's to say attempting to reform the system will not eventually lead back to square one, assuming such reform is possible? The state is a parasitic thing that once latched on it keeps sucking and grows larger from the human capital it consumes. No ammount of 'reform' can resolve the fundamental evil of coercion and the monopoly on force of current systems. This is a key point because it is impossible to remove the very thing that would not make it a state or government anymore. Look beyond 'asking for scraps' approach as this subject is too important for humanity and attempt to start from first principles instead. The notion of defense against potential adversaries in a world of scarce resources is a valid concern but in an anarchic society people who want to will be armed to the teeth among the examples already stated. Current concerns of potential adversaries is largely the wizardry of the neo imperialist statists to keep the masses in perpetual anxiety. As long as there are self proclaimed rulers exempt from the morality and the 'laws' they enforce talking about reform is just a detour which eventually leads back to where you started and you realise the parasite is still latched on. I recommend watching, if you haven't so already, Stef's 'They control humans with words'.

I've tried unsuccessfully even by example to persuade my mom to quitting. I've been smoking since I was 16 and have quit on three occasions with the first time the longest, almost two years. I think Gabor Mates theories in particular explain some of it. People look to fill a void as a coping mechanism. My mom lacks self knowledge, was herself emotionally and physically absued, has not sought therapy and is mostly immune to reason. In my experience others can only do so much with varying degrees of affect but in the end it's up to the self proprietor to decide.

What do you mean by "... in the absence of any knowledge of physical reality..."? Logically or through inference your very existence and capacity for thought like posting here (action to achieve goal) presupposes reality. Absence of knowledge of physical reality I think is a contradiction in terms. Logic dictates that you cannot survive without eating or drinking for an extended period of time. As far as I understand logic is essentially the law of identity. Your or my subjective (watching the sun set) identification of the objective physical world (the sun sets) which is matter and energy.

Walt Disney the Shrewd, brother mason and unsubstantiated purported pedophile, created an empire which became (in)famous for sexual subliminals and child characters usually missing a ma or a pa and sometimes both. Conspiracy theories abound as per usual but that won't bother one of the most successful entertainment empires in the world. Miss Piggy might retire prematurely but I'm sure Phase 21 of Marvel's cinematic universe would be in theaters and Titanic had long ago been displaced by star wars as the highest grossing film. Me thinks Miss Piggy is quite safe until the folk antagonistic to an animal who not only is relatively intelligent but tastes good also, decide to unleash wholesale war and purge their place of inhabitation of these miscreants. In their bloodlust everything pig related shall perish, no idol or children's toy or piece of furniture will be spared. Oh poor pigs how unjust your reputation is. I'm sure most farmers can safely be considered said animal's natural ally and multitudes of the young may voice protest that a household farm animal has had war declared upon it with no animal equivalent united nations to defend its pig rights.

Indeed and it gives me chills even with my novice understanding. I was born a year after Chernobyl in southeast Ukraine, and even though the heroic efforts contained the corium preventing wholesale contamination of the river, the radiation release went west and to this day afaik nobody knows the actual human toll vast as it probably was/is. That disaster is firmly part of the cultural fabric of the former soviet lands, everyone knows Pripyat and its very mention is like Berezina to the French. What is your view on Gen III reactors vs Gen II such as Fukishima and is there some prospect to minimise the potential for catastrophes? What about Gen IV reactors, I'd assume with each iteration in design the emergency response to disasters would see some practical advances. I don't think expensive and supposedly complex machinery used at Fukishima for the clean up had a lifespan lower than that of a butterfly would count as adequate or competent response!

Much appreciated OP. I've since coming across this thread done some minor reading, a couple of websites and just then finishing an article on counterpunch. I suspected like one suspects a cough a symptom of a common cold instead of a malignant tumor pressing upon affected organs that this was bad when it happened but not to the extent it appears to be. Like FFS the Japanese prime minister Abe and his statist goons amended the constitution (which apparently forbids such a change but we live in a statist world postcode arbitrary) for power to invoke secrecy laws and jail anyone deemed spreading state secrets. Such seems the need to limit information flow.

I think using a QM principle as an analogy re morality is problematic because it infers similarity. The uncertainty principle occupies more of an abstract existence because it's a mathematical assertion. Whilst morality (don't kill, rape, thieve or assault) can be validated or shown true (UPB?). At no time do I feel uncertain if I should violate someone else’s property rights. I've read some good articles on lewrockwell.com talking about justice in a stateless society and some solid points were made for the two teeth for a tooth approach when it comes to property violations. To me what is certain is that the title 'morality uncertainty principle' is uncertain. I find the title confusing. When you say that the more you know about morality the more objective it becomes, could you clarify? Seems unnecessary, since by saying 'the more you know...." already qualifies as objective since there's something to know and it requires to look outward. The rest of your points are curious even though perhaps your premise is faulty. Please correct me if I'm wrong so the first hurdle can be cleared as I want to understand. Maybe it's because I'm conflicted when it comes to QM for its volatility. Just to give you an idea where I'm coming from http://www.arcaneknowledge.org/science/quantum.htm

Thanks Graham. Lenghy read and slighty dense, the maths equations made my simpleton brain more simple. Titles such as 'nobel laureate' etc don't sit well with me including the use of 'professional scientists' in the link. To me it approaches appeal to authority and ignores merit as though the benefactions of some organizations and their coveted trophies are above or legitimate mans capacity for reason. I don't lean either way here as i lack the necessary mathematical knowledgeable. From an epistemic and ontological view I find it interesting. For example those who approach QM from a platonic foundation or relying more on induction and pure logic. I'm probably missing something but to me drawing conclusions about reality from abstract mathematics alone isn't accurate enough.

I'll play along, after all a penchant for hypotheticals is a privilege of the rational animal. My prediction is simple. 2016 will be mark a small step closer to either reason reigning supreme or the status quo ante bellum comfortably in its place smugly looking down onto those who dared to challenge it. Erratic weather due to a probable mini ice age developing shouldn't be excluded imo.