Probably a bad idea to bring up homosexuality in the thread, I suppose. Anyway, we don't seem to be getting any farther here, so we'll just have to disagree.
Bad Thinkers Why do some people believe conspiracy theories?
- Thread starter The Barbarian
- Start date
Probably a bad idea to bring up homosexuality in the thread, I suppose. Anyway, we don't seem to be getting any farther here, so we'll just have to disagree.
What?
You started a thread about why people believe in conspiracy theories. The purpose of doing so is now clear. You wanted an excuse to present some article about growing brain regions, the obvious implication being that these regions are responsible at least in part for the aberrant thinking. You were called out on that point and had to walk it back but now are refusing to continue the discussion in any other direction.
You're a liar Barbarian! That's what you are. A flat out Adam Schiff style liar.
Good bye!
Barbarian observes:
Probably a bad idea to bring up homosexuality in the thread, I suppose. Anyway, we don't seem to be getting any farther here, so we'll just have to disagree.
Bringing homosexuality into it. Bad idea. Moral equivalency fallacy, and so on.
Yep. How you do think homosexuality fits in with that? It's as though you want to change the subject.
I don't profess to read minds, so I can only infer from behavior.
It was about why some people are prone to conspiracy theories. Deep state, lizard people, stuff like that. How some details of brain anatomy nicely predict political attitudes.
You're getting closer. As I showed you, these structures have useful functions, But the point is not that they cause aberrant thinking. (indeed every genius who comes up with useful new ideas exhibits "aberrant" thinking) Rather, it's that the relative size of these two structures at least partially determines the kind of aberrant thinking that may occur.
No, you merely misunderstood and you didn't like the direction things took when I clarified it.
You can't seem to get past the data. And that's a shame.
Unless I'm joking, I never say anything here that I don't believe. And when I joke, I try to add my WFTH-I to let people know.
I think if you were less locked into your political fixations, you would be less likely to get frustrated and fall into verbal abuse.
Perhaps that would have been a better idea a few posts back. You're clearly not stupid, and you seem to have decent motives. I didn't intend to get you angry, but I did.
Probably a bad idea to bring up homosexuality in the thread, I suppose. Anyway, we don't seem to be getting any farther here, so we'll just have to disagree.
Bringing homosexuality into it. Bad idea. Moral equivalency fallacy, and so on.
Yep. How you do think homosexuality fits in with that? It's as though you want to change the subject.
I don't profess to read minds, so I can only infer from behavior.
It was about why some people are prone to conspiracy theories. Deep state, lizard people, stuff like that. How some details of brain anatomy nicely predict political attitudes.
You're getting closer. As I showed you, these structures have useful functions, But the point is not that they cause aberrant thinking. (indeed every genius who comes up with useful new ideas exhibits "aberrant" thinking) Rather, it's that the relative size of these two structures at least partially determines the kind of aberrant thinking that may occur.
No, you merely misunderstood and you didn't like the direction things took when I clarified it.
You can't seem to get past the data. And that's a shame.
Unless I'm joking, I never say anything here that I don't believe. And when I joke, I try to add my WFTH-I to let people know.
I think if you were less locked into your political fixations, you would be less likely to get frustrated and fall into verbal abuse.
Perhaps that would have been a better idea a few posts back. You're clearly not stupid, and you seem to have decent motives. I didn't intend to get you angry, but I did.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
of course you did, it's how you win the game of trolling - you get your target to lose his cool and react angrily
And the troll entourage appears as "Exhibit A."
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
yes troll, i suppose i am your entourage, one of the very few people here who pay you any attention at all
still, i suppose any attention at all stokes your fragile ego, even if it's the sort of attention that points out your reputation as a troll and a liar
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
I made no such moral equivalency and you know it. You a liar.
Welcome to my ignore list.
You perhaps didn't know that Darwin asserted that eugenic ideas were "an overwhelming evil" and that later Darwinists like Punnett showed that eugenic ideas are also scientifically insupportable. Would you like to see more about that?
On the other hand, as late as the 1990s, one founder of the Institute for Creation research was writing about the supposed intellectual and spiritual inferiority of black people. And another founder was still in favor of keeping "inferior" people from reproducing according to his eugenic ideas.
Want to learn more about those?
It's hard to find a racist biologist, precisely because evolutionary theory shows that there are no biological human races today. Want to learn how we know that?
You a little overwrought, I think. If you thought homosexuality wasn't germane to the discussion, you shouldn't have brought it up here.
Probably for the best. I seem to bring out the worst in you.
That's the goal of a troll.
Interesting! Yes, I'd like to know more information about these topics.
O.K. Darwin wrote in The Descent of Man:
Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral Faculties
"The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil."
Reginald Punnett:
[COLOR=330000]Punnett made an early indictment of the methods during a presentation at the First International Congress on Eugenics in 1911 – the year The Trait Book was published: "Except in very few cases, our knowledge of heredity in man is at present far too slight and too uncertain to base legislation upon…It must be clearly recognized that the collection of such [accurate] pedigrees is an arduous undertaking demanding high critical ability…"[/COLOR]
http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/...ssay4text.html
In 1917 Punnett again sought Hardy’s help over a similar problem, and this time Hardy himself calculated how slowly a recessive lethal is eliminated from a population, thus apparently discrediting the eugenicists’ claim that deleterious recessives could be eliminated in a few generations (Punnett 1917b).
https://www.genetics.org/content/192/1/3
Adherents of the new field of genetics were ambivalent about eugenics. Most basic scientists – including William Bateson in Great Britain, and Thomas Hunt Morgan in the United States – shunned eugenics as vulgar and an unproductive field for research. http://eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay2text.html
Morgan was, as a young scientist, interested in eugenics, but as he made new discoveries in genetics, it became clear to him that the idea was flawed.
Franz Boas was the most important figure in 20th century North American anthropology. He laid down the four-field structure of anthropology around cultural anthropology, physical anthropology, linguistics and archaeology. He advocated that these four fields of research should all unite to provide a complete picture of anthropological research.
His 1911 publication “The Mind of Primitive Man”, was based on a series of lectures concerning race and culture. It was influential in undercutting eugenics arguments and lessened the significance of anthropometric measures of race.
Boas stated in the book:
“I hope the discussions outlined in these pages have shown that the data of anthropology teach us a greater tolerance of forms of civilization different from our own, that we should learn to look on foreign races with greater sympathy and with a conviction that, as all races have contributed in the past to cultural progress in one way or another, so they will be capable of advancing the interests of mankind if we are only willing to give them a fair opportunity.”
https://www.famousscientists.org/franz-boas/
On the other hand... creationists... Henry Morris, one of the founders of the Institute for Creation Research: “Their future will be one of service—providing mainly for the material and physical needs of mankind. Shem, on the other hand, with his concern for the Lord and His honor, will through his descendants lead men to know and follow God. Japheth also, with his more serious approach to life and its meaning, will see his descendants enlarged geographically and mentally, coming to dwell finally in the spiritual house built by the children of Shem. The children of Ham, however, even those of his youngest and least responsible son, Canaan, will have to be content with giving service to both Shem and Japheth providing the material basis of human society, upon which the spiritual and intellectual concerns of mankind can be superimposed. ... Thus, all of the earth’s ‘colored’ races—yellow, red, brown, and black; essentially the Afro-Asian group of peoples, including the American Indians—are possibly Hamitic in origin and included within the scope of the Canaanitic prophecy, as well as the Egyptians, Sumerians, Hittites, and Phoenicians of antiquity. ... Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they were eventually displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.” Henry Morris The Beginning of the World
Even more problematic for the claim that “Darwinism” was critical and instrumental in the development of eugenics is the uncomfortable fact that eugenics was also openly embraced by opponents of evolution (the first eugenics sterilization laws in the world were passed in 1907 Indiana, hardly a hotbed of “Darwinists”). The most notable of these anti-evolution eugenics supporters was probably William J. Tinkle, geneticist and prominent Creationist. Tinkle taught at religious LaVerne College and Taylor University, and participated in the activities of the Deluge Society, the first “Creation Science” organization. He then joined forces with the “young lions” of Creationism, Henry Morris, Duane Gish and Walter Lammerts, and with them he was one of the 10 Founding Fathers of the Creation Research Society, which later became the Institute for Creation Research.
Tinkle opposed evolution and Darwinian theory, but was an enthusiastic proponent of eugenics, and published several articles on the subject. In his 1939 textbook “Fundamentals of Zoology” he devotes a section to “The Need of Human Betterment”, where he laments the existence of “defective families” who “give birth to offspring like themselves” , producing “persons of low mentality, paupers and criminals in much greater ratio than the general population” [8, p. 130]. Negative eugenics via institutionalization seems to have been his preferred eugenic solution:
It is an excellent plan to keep defective people in institutions for here they are not permitted to marry and bear children.[8, p. 131]
and
[Scientists who are working at the task of improving the human race] would like to increase the birth rate of families having good heredity, while those people having poor heredity should not marry at all.[8, p. 131]
https://uncommondescent.com/darwinis...e-in-the-past/
https://uncommondescent.com/darwinis...e-in-the-past/
[h=3]Human Genome Project Confirms that "Race" Simply Does Not Exist as a Matter of Biology[/h]
DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other.
https://cdn.citl.illinois.edu/courses/KINES249/Week7/Lecture7.1/web_data/file11.htm
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
oh, good
then we no longer have to recognize race based differences in disease prevalence?
Trolls will disagree, of course...:chuckle:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Let's look at some of the assertions in this thread.
1. To believe conspiracies exist is loony. This assertion in and of itself is loony. Conspiracies have been going on for thousands of years. The RICO act was passed into law just to deal with conspiracies. That right there is proof positive that conspiracies exist and that they are a legitimate target to investigate.
2. Who decides what is a loony conspiracy theory? The media that lies to us constantly? Corrupt politicians? The CIA? They are the ones that put the idea into the press' head to start calling anyone who had dug up some of their smarmy operations in the US a "conspiracy theorist". The CIA is constantly creating conspiracies to work against governments, including our own. It's their job. It's the reason the CIA was created. James Clapper even admitted this when he said he was following orders when he started the entire Russia hoax inside the intelligence agencies. Other DCIs have admitted that they have worked against not only the US public but the world by creating operations that work behind the scenes unknown to the general public. That's what a conspiracy does.
3. Let's look at one "conspiracy theory" that the mockingbird media, including ABC, called loony time and time again. It's called Pizza Gate. What was the underlying theme of Pizza Gate? That there were very wealthy and powerful individuals, including politicians, involved in pedophilia and child sex trafficking. What was revealed to the general public by Amy Robach's leaked tape? That a very wealthy pedophile and human trafficker had deep and long term connections to a lot of the most powerful politicians in this nation. He was flying many of them to his private island for massive parties there. And there he was collecting the information he needed to blackmail them. Remember, Amy Robach said Epstein made a lot of his money by blackmailing people and that if she was Epstein's girlfriend she would be very afraid and have lots security around her at all times. The underlying idea there is that Maxwell is in serious danger because she was the one doing the recruiting of the young girls for Epstein and his politically connected friends to use as sexual objects. That means that people with the power of life and death would be very interested in seeing her disappear.
All of this is confirmation of the things that the Pizza Gate researchers dug up. They tied, not only the most powerful people in the US, but around the world, to pedophilia and child sex trafficking. They also tied them to satanic worship, and if you look at some of the friends and close associates of many of the very powerful people here in the US you will find "artists" who deal exclusively in satanic themes. Maria Abramovich is one of them. Her "parties" have life sized cakes that look like dead people in pools of blood. The guests come around and eat those cakes. She also throws spirit cooking dinner parties which are purely satanic in nature. There is nothing wholesome about anything that she does. It's all evil. Oh, and just so you know she is closely connected with a bunch of the leadership of the Democrat party. I wouldn't doubt she is also connected to high ranking Republicans too, but I've never seen the evidence for that.
Human trafficking is the most lucrative illegal business in the world. Human trafficker's income dwarfs that of the drug cartels. Why? Because you can sell a sex slave over and over and over again for people to abuse, but you can only sell a drug once, and then it is consumed and the inventory replaced. The people who traffic in humans don't have a one shot deal with their inventory. They may resell their product anywhere from a few times up to hundreds of times. It just depends on who they sell their victims to and for what use as to how long they can survive.
4. Claiming that "conspiracy theories" are the sole property of loonies is itself a conspiracy theory for it denies that conspiracies exist and yet history and the daily news tells us conspiracies are quite common. It's those swallowing the line of thought that "conspiracy theories" are the sole property of loonies who are the "bad thinkers" for their assertions are, and have been throughout human history, disproved again, and again, and again. And yet they ignore all those well-established facts to trumpet their claims in the face of all the evidence against the claims.
1. To believe conspiracies exist is loony. This assertion in and of itself is loony. Conspiracies have been going on for thousands of years. The RICO act was passed into law just to deal with conspiracies. That right there is proof positive that conspiracies exist and that they are a legitimate target to investigate.
2. Who decides what is a loony conspiracy theory? The media that lies to us constantly? Corrupt politicians? The CIA? They are the ones that put the idea into the press' head to start calling anyone who had dug up some of their smarmy operations in the US a "conspiracy theorist". The CIA is constantly creating conspiracies to work against governments, including our own. It's their job. It's the reason the CIA was created. James Clapper even admitted this when he said he was following orders when he started the entire Russia hoax inside the intelligence agencies. Other DCIs have admitted that they have worked against not only the US public but the world by creating operations that work behind the scenes unknown to the general public. That's what a conspiracy does.
3. Let's look at one "conspiracy theory" that the mockingbird media, including ABC, called loony time and time again. It's called Pizza Gate. What was the underlying theme of Pizza Gate? That there were very wealthy and powerful individuals, including politicians, involved in pedophilia and child sex trafficking. What was revealed to the general public by Amy Robach's leaked tape? That a very wealthy pedophile and human trafficker had deep and long term connections to a lot of the most powerful politicians in this nation. He was flying many of them to his private island for massive parties there. And there he was collecting the information he needed to blackmail them. Remember, Amy Robach said Epstein made a lot of his money by blackmailing people and that if she was Epstein's girlfriend she would be very afraid and have lots security around her at all times. The underlying idea there is that Maxwell is in serious danger because she was the one doing the recruiting of the young girls for Epstein and his politically connected friends to use as sexual objects. That means that people with the power of life and death would be very interested in seeing her disappear.
All of this is confirmation of the things that the Pizza Gate researchers dug up. They tied, not only the most powerful people in the US, but around the world, to pedophilia and child sex trafficking. They also tied them to satanic worship, and if you look at some of the friends and close associates of many of the very powerful people here in the US you will find "artists" who deal exclusively in satanic themes. Maria Abramovich is one of them. Her "parties" have life sized cakes that look like dead people in pools of blood. The guests come around and eat those cakes. She also throws spirit cooking dinner parties which are purely satanic in nature. There is nothing wholesome about anything that she does. It's all evil. Oh, and just so you know she is closely connected with a bunch of the leadership of the Democrat party. I wouldn't doubt she is also connected to high ranking Republicans too, but I've never seen the evidence for that.
Human trafficking is the most lucrative illegal business in the world. Human trafficker's income dwarfs that of the drug cartels. Why? Because you can sell a sex slave over and over and over again for people to abuse, but you can only sell a drug once, and then it is consumed and the inventory replaced. The people who traffic in humans don't have a one shot deal with their inventory. They may resell their product anywhere from a few times up to hundreds of times. It just depends on who they sell their victims to and for what use as to how long they can survive.
4. Claiming that "conspiracy theories" are the sole property of loonies is itself a conspiracy theory for it denies that conspiracies exist and yet history and the daily news tells us conspiracies are quite common. It's those swallowing the line of thought that "conspiracy theories" are the sole property of loonies who are the "bad thinkers" for their assertions are, and have been throughout human history, disproved again, and again, and again. And yet they ignore all those well-established facts to trumpet their claims in the face of all the evidence against the claims.