This sounds a LOT like how it is to debate athiests. They will just repeat the cute little quip "wherzzz da prewfsss??/?/?//?" even when i bombard them with evidence after evidence and scrutinize their beliefs.
Smart enough to ask for evidence, but still too dumb to follow it through, apparently....
Good point. Modern atheism/agnosticism (an euphemism for satanism and anti-christianity), dressed as scientism and rational skepticism, is a demonic (jewish) psy op. Not only it subverts people's belief in the Christian God, but also makes them accustomed to the idea that there is no purpose in the world, that everything is a result of a random cause and effect mechanism and is therefore completely coincidental and ultimately meaningless.
In the atheist worldview there is no grand scheme of things, no planning, no conspiring happening on any level, even in the incredibly complex design of our world. It's just random atoms bumping into each other, resulting in intricate patterns of structure and behavior. Same goes for organizations of people and society - it's all random, bro.
Atheism and materialism programs people to be coincidence theorists. I can guarantee the guy in the OP story was one of them.
No, atheism is the realization that of all the tools to control people, none has been so effective historically as religion.
Atheism is the realization that the single biggest modern ring of active pedophiles is the Catholic Church, and no one who remains devoted that church has any credibility when they talk about looking for pedophiles in government.
Atheist is the realization that there’s no good reason to believe in fairytales or the Easter, bunny, or fairies, or gods.
Is the NWO and the impending technocracy built on religion (Christianity) or atheism and scientism?
What was the promoted worldview in the communist revolutions of the past like the French, the Bolshevik or the Maoist revolutions which instantiated the most totalitarian regimes in terms of physical and psychological control of people known in history?
What is the underlying system in predictive novels like 1984 and Brave New World?
In the end you too belief in things you can't really justify. Not only that - I'd argue you hold a contradictory worldview and I can demonstrate it in a debate. I've dealt with many atheists and their arguments are always reddit-tier. I've come to the conclusion atheists never know basic philosophy, including philosophy of science, and yet they make sweeping claims about what is, what and can be known, how we have knowledge etc. Most of them don't even know who David Hume is.
You just met "proof beggar", that's all. "Proof beggars" are kind of trolls, they never provide any proofs by themselves, think that proof is just some expert statement, and never will accept any proof you provide. Even if something extremely easy to check, they will never check it by themselves. They don't need to, it's not their goal. They want just eat your time for nothing and that's all.
There also exist complete opposite of "proof beggars" - they will pretend that some idiocy is a total proof of something they believe, and can't be argued against for reasons. Nothing could shake their conviction at all.
Both types have one thing in common - they never want to know how things really works or at least try to understand thing they argue about, instead they always just blindly believe in something somebody else told them or something they read, heard or watch somewhere once. None of them ever made their own conclusion on any matter, they always consume someone else bullshit.
If facts mattered, this should be enough to make every normie soyence enjoyer shut up when waxing poetic about "muh science" and "muh experts".
This is not even counting the crazy amount of conflict of interests, revolving door authors and bought academics and institutions that plague scientific research. Only a complete tool who is clueless about the world, history, common sense and human nature can believe science can't be corrupted or bought. And you shouldn't waste time arguing with such NPCs to begin with.
Exactly. It comes straight from the horse's mouth but normies will be normies and will hold to their regime-sanctioned irrational beliefs no matter what.
"Scientific research" for the past few decades has been completely fake and gay.
This has been intimated by A. Huxley (Royal Society fabian socialist) in Brave New World in the chapter where the main hero meets the technocratic controller Mustapha Mond, who gets to decide what will be published based on ideological principles.
"Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see" from Strawberry Fields.
This has been an age old problem because it scares the living crap out of most people to think about what's really going on in the world. My wife hates when I talk about this kind of stuff because it scares her. I asked her once if she didn't like it because I sounded crazy and she said no, it's because it scares her to think about what's really happening. She would rather occupy her mind with reddit drama or sitcoms on TV so she doesn't have to think about it. Amazing how well they have dominated most people
Free-dom implies each beings choice within natures balance...your wife operates within imbalance, hence wanting reddit drama or sitcoms on TV vs not wanting to think about what's really going on.
Only balance dominates...imbalance implies subservience by free will of choice.
Few suggest information to tempt many to occupy their minds with it, while ignoring that one cannot take possession of perceivable inspiration moving through ones mind.
Information warfare is based upon few tempting many to take possession of information, while ignoring inspiration...which occupies the mind with artifice, while making the being vacant within nature.
Sleight of hand: "It's deepest impulse of a jewish soul to pull at the very fabric of life until there's nothing left but a thread...they want nothing but nothingness; nothingness without end" ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRUjy1Dhx-k
That nothingness represents the vacant state of a gentile mind possessed by suggested information. A gentile possessed seeks to fill the emptiness inside with endless more information aka "reddit drama or sitcoms on TV"...
Normies can't be intellectuals in the real sense of the word. Being an intellectual requires independent thought, entertaining different possibilities (openness), critical thinking, analyzing information and putting it in a coherent theory, and most important of all - love of truth above all.
Within dependence to what? To depend implies "attached to cause", which contradicts cause generating effects by separating each from one another.
different possibilities (openness)...and most important of all - love of truth above all.
a) How can there be anything above ALL?
b) Love vs hate and truth vs lies implies different sides turning against one another, hence not openness, but closeness.
analyzing information
Nature doesn't generate information, but inspiration. Information is shaped within nature by ones consent to the suggestion of another aka a synthesis...not an analysis.
critical thinking
Critic/krinein - "to separate"...holding onto "love of truth" implies attachment, while ignoring separation.
Sleight of hand: "everyone's a critic", because ONE implies separation from one another.
Within dependence to what? To depend implies "attached to cause", which contradicts cause generating effects by separating each from one another.
Independent from the status quo and the world. As in being able to think universally and in absolute terms instead of being dependent on your circumstance, immediate environment and subjective condition.
a) How can there be anything above ALL?
"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” - John 8:32
"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." - John 14:6
b) Love vs hate and truth vs lies implies different sides turning against one another, hence not openness, but closeness.
Openness (of heart) is necessary for one to see the truth. Openness is not lack of distinction and doesn't imply relativism here (as in Popper's Open Society).
a) Status (state) + quo (within which) aka status (ones perception) quo (all perceivable)...once again implying a separation from one another, while dependence implies attaching self (consent) to another (suggested).
b) World/worold - "human secular existence" from secular/saecularis/sai - "to bind; tie"...the word "world" is being suggested to distract from the status (perception) quo (perceivable).
being able to think universally
a) Being able implies being (life) enabled (inception towards death)...linear progression.
b) Uni (one) vers (to turn) implies turning against one another...circular thinking.
c) VERS tempts UNI to ignore ALL...it's a crafted spell. Only one within all can see this; while others are blind to it by turning against each other.
in absolute terms
a) Absolute (free from limitation) contradicts term (boundary)
b) Being implies free (choice) within limitation (balance), hence not bound, but set free (living) during limitation (dying).
c) The trick...terminology aka suggested terms tempting ones consent into circular logic, hence binding self to another aka ones choice to a chosen one.
circumstance
Aka ones stance within a circle...as opposed to ones stance (life) within linear progression (inception towards death).
A kike/kikel - "circle" erects at center while circumcising circumference...
immediate environment
Im (within) mediate (middle) + en (within) viron (circle) ment (mind)...ones consent to any suggestion permits another to mediate information into ones mind, where one holds into during circular thinking (logic), which outwardly turns into conflicts of reason against others.
IM + EN implies "within" one...not the suggested "immediate environment" outside of one. Only oneself can see through this deception, because anything another suggests comes from outside self.
And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
KNOW (perceivable) sets FREE (perception)...truth/treowð - "faith; pledge, covenant" binds one to one another.
Notice also...truth/deru - "be firm, solid". Being implies form (life) within flow (inception towards death). Truth tempts form to pledge to other form (Jesus Christ), while ignoring flow (God).
That pledge of faith implies religion aka RE (to respond) LIGO (to bind)...
Jesus said to him, “I am...
Je suis (I am)...why would I AM say I AM? Because...
I am what I am
I am my own special creation
So come take a look
Give me the hook or the ovation
It's my world that I want to have a little pride in
Openness (of heart) is necessary for one to see the truth...
...and yet the mind holds onto the truth, while blinding ones outward sight inwardly.
Also...necessity was before heart comes into being. It's inception opening and death closing necessity for each ones life within.
Openness is not lack of distinction
Using IS implies a synthesis between suggestion and consent, which when consented to...makes distinction unrecognizable.
Nature WAS perceivable before a being within can suggest what it IS to one another.
is not lack of
Is implies vs isn't...there's the "lack of". One cannot suggest what anything is without implying what it isn't. It's suggestion which conjures consent into a lack of aka into nihil-ism (nihilo; nothing).
is...doesn't imply relativism
Relate/relatus - "to carry back" hence carrying suggested information back from perceivable inspiration, while tempting the consent of another to burden self with it.
It's the -ism which shapes a suggestion out of perceivable re-lat-ion aka action carrying back (inception towards death) reaction (life).
open society
Society/sekw - "to follow"...life can only follow opening (inception) towards closing (death), which life needs to resist the wanted temptation of.
This is kinda what I was talking about the other day with the AI, it kept bringing up Cognitive dissonance.
Its not like we, or I dont suffer from it either. Sometimes its hard to let go of an idea after you believed in it for so long.
But I think thats what separates "conspiracy theorist" like us, with normys like your friend. We try to not let these ideas conflict with us, but instead try to understand more to figure it out.
When someone is in this state, it doesnt matter what you say, in my experience. Theyve already closed their minds off.
I left appalachia because of all the closed minds, only to discover that mainstream society is even worse. Ive also noticed that kids and young people are usually the most open and receptive. Older people tend to be very static and stereotypical of that saying.
When someone is in this state, it doesnt matter what you say, in my experience. Theyve already closed their minds off.
This is the only meaningful distinction between people when it comes to arguments. It's not a matter of knowledge, facts, IQ. You can't make a person see something if he doesn't want to. It's a moral problem really.
Now ask AI why it would bring up a contradiction...
Its not like we, or I don't suffer from it either.
Nothing (not) vs everything; like vs dislike; plural (we) vs singular (I); do vs don't...that's the cognitive dissonance aka contra (against) diction (to speak) within your mind.
Only letting go of both sides relieves ones self imposed suffering...
Sometimes its hard to let go of...
Every time it's easier to hold onto, because that's the path of least resistance during motion.
what separates conspiracy
CON (together) + SPIRO (to breathe)...others CON one into ignoring that breathing implies separation.
We try to not let these ideas conflict with us
We vs they; everything vs nothing (not); us vs them...three conflicts within half a sentence about trying to avoid conflicts.
closed their minds off
Circular thinking (logic) turning into conflict (reason) closes ones mind off from implication (if/then) aka linear progression.
kids and young people are usually the most open and receptive
Because young memory hasn't received much old information yet. Holding onto information within memory ages it faster, while spoiling memory with the rotting fruit of forbidden (suggested) knowledge (perceivable).
Forbid aka for (forwards) + bid (to ask) implies being forwarded within perceivable inspiration, while asking for suggested information.
This sounds a LOT like how it is to debate athiests. They will just repeat the cute little quip "wherzzz da prewfsss??/?/?//?" even when i bombard them with evidence after evidence and scrutinize their beliefs.
Smart enough to ask for evidence, but still too dumb to follow it through, apparently....
Good point. Modern atheism/agnosticism (an euphemism for satanism and anti-christianity), dressed as scientism and rational skepticism, is a demonic (jewish) psy op. Not only it subverts people's belief in the Christian God, but also makes them accustomed to the idea that there is no purpose in the world, that everything is a result of a random cause and effect mechanism and is therefore completely coincidental and ultimately meaningless.
In the atheist worldview there is no grand scheme of things, no planning, no conspiring happening on any level, even in the incredibly complex design of our world. It's just random atoms bumping into each other, resulting in intricate patterns of structure and behavior. Same goes for organizations of people and society - it's all random, bro.
Atheism and materialism programs people to be coincidence theorists. I can guarantee the guy in the OP story was one of them.
No, atheism is the realization that of all the tools to control people, none has been so effective historically as religion.
Atheism is the realization that the single biggest modern ring of active pedophiles is the Catholic Church, and no one who remains devoted that church has any credibility when they talk about looking for pedophiles in government.
Atheist is the realization that there’s no good reason to believe in fairytales or the Easter, bunny, or fairies, or gods.
Is the NWO and the impending technocracy built on religion (Christianity) or atheism and scientism?
What was the promoted worldview in the communist revolutions of the past like the French, the Bolshevik or the Maoist revolutions which instantiated the most totalitarian regimes in terms of physical and psychological control of people known in history?
What is the underlying system in predictive novels like 1984 and Brave New World?
In the end you too belief in things you can't really justify. Not only that - I'd argue you hold a contradictory worldview and I can demonstrate it in a debate. I've dealt with many atheists and their arguments are always reddit-tier. I've come to the conclusion atheists never know basic philosophy, including philosophy of science, and yet they make sweeping claims about what is, what and can be known, how we have knowledge etc. Most of them don't even know who David Hume is.
Ultra based. We need power people like you!
Standing firm in the Lord -> knowledge, wisdom, logic, reason ! :D
You just met "proof beggar", that's all. "Proof beggars" are kind of trolls, they never provide any proofs by themselves, think that proof is just some expert statement, and never will accept any proof you provide. Even if something extremely easy to check, they will never check it by themselves. They don't need to, it's not their goal. They want just eat your time for nothing and that's all.
There also exist complete opposite of "proof beggars" - they will pretend that some idiocy is a total proof of something they believe, and can't be argued against for reasons. Nothing could shake their conviction at all.
Both types have one thing in common - they never want to know how things really works or at least try to understand thing they argue about, instead they always just blindly believe in something somebody else told them or something they read, heard or watch somewhere once. None of them ever made their own conclusion on any matter, they always consume someone else bullshit.
You should have told him about the replication crisis while you were at it.
It's much worse. The chief editor of the Lancet wrote an article saying at least half of peer-reviewed papers are likely false.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext
If facts mattered, this should be enough to make every normie soyence enjoyer shut up when waxing poetic about "muh science" and "muh experts".
This is not even counting the crazy amount of conflict of interests, revolving door authors and bought academics and institutions that plague scientific research. Only a complete tool who is clueless about the world, history, common sense and human nature can believe science can't be corrupted or bought. And you shouldn't waste time arguing with such NPCs to begin with.
Exactly. It comes straight from the horse's mouth but normies will be normies and will hold to their regime-sanctioned irrational beliefs no matter what.
"Scientific research" for the past few decades has been completely fake and gay. This has been intimated by A. Huxley (Royal Society fabian socialist) in Brave New World in the chapter where the main hero meets the technocratic controller Mustapha Mond, who gets to decide what will be published based on ideological principles.
"Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see" from Strawberry Fields.
This has been an age old problem because it scares the living crap out of most people to think about what's really going on in the world. My wife hates when I talk about this kind of stuff because it scares her. I asked her once if she didn't like it because I sounded crazy and she said no, it's because it scares her to think about what's really happening. She would rather occupy her mind with reddit drama or sitcoms on TV so she doesn't have to think about it. Amazing how well they have dominated most people
Free-dom implies each beings choice within natures balance...your wife operates within imbalance, hence wanting reddit drama or sitcoms on TV vs not wanting to think about what's really going on.
Only balance dominates...imbalance implies subservience by free will of choice.
Occupy implies "taking possession of"...mind implies potential (perception) during procession (perceivable).
Few suggest information to tempt many to occupy their minds with it, while ignoring that one cannot take possession of perceivable inspiration moving through ones mind.
Information warfare is based upon few tempting many to take possession of information, while ignoring inspiration...which occupies the mind with artifice, while making the being vacant within nature.
Sleight of hand: "It's deepest impulse of a jewish soul to pull at the very fabric of life until there's nothing left but a thread...they want nothing but nothingness; nothingness without end" ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRUjy1Dhx-k
That nothingness represents the vacant state of a gentile mind possessed by suggested information. A gentile possessed seeks to fill the emptiness inside with endless more information aka "reddit drama or sitcoms on TV"...
Well said.
Thanks for the inspiration.
It was an excellent break down.
Normies can't be intellectuals in the real sense of the word. Being an intellectual requires independent thought, entertaining different possibilities (openness), critical thinking, analyzing information and putting it in a coherent theory, and most important of all - love of truth above all.
Within dependence to what? To depend implies "attached to cause", which contradicts cause generating effects by separating each from one another.
a) How can there be anything above ALL?
b) Love vs hate and truth vs lies implies different sides turning against one another, hence not openness, but closeness.
Nature doesn't generate information, but inspiration. Information is shaped within nature by ones consent to the suggestion of another aka a synthesis...not an analysis.
Critic/krinein - "to separate"...holding onto "love of truth" implies attachment, while ignoring separation.
Sleight of hand: "everyone's a critic", because ONE implies separation from one another.
Independent from the status quo and the world. As in being able to think universally and in absolute terms instead of being dependent on your circumstance, immediate environment and subjective condition.
"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” - John 8:32
"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." - John 14:6
Openness (of heart) is necessary for one to see the truth. Openness is not lack of distinction and doesn't imply relativism here (as in Popper's Open Society).
a) Status (state) + quo (within which) aka status (ones perception) quo (all perceivable)...once again implying a separation from one another, while dependence implies attaching self (consent) to another (suggested).
b) World/worold - "human secular existence" from secular/saecularis/sai - "to bind; tie"...the word "world" is being suggested to distract from the status (perception) quo (perceivable).
a) Being able implies being (life) enabled (inception towards death)...linear progression.
b) Uni (one) vers (to turn) implies turning against one another...circular thinking.
c) VERS tempts UNI to ignore ALL...it's a crafted spell. Only one within all can see this; while others are blind to it by turning against each other.
a) Absolute (free from limitation) contradicts term (boundary)
b) Being implies free (choice) within limitation (balance), hence not bound, but set free (living) during limitation (dying).
c) The trick...terminology aka suggested terms tempting ones consent into circular logic, hence binding self to another aka ones choice to a chosen one.
Aka ones stance within a circle...as opposed to ones stance (life) within linear progression (inception towards death).
A kike/kikel - "circle" erects at center while circumcising circumference...
Im (within) mediate (middle) + en (within) viron (circle) ment (mind)...ones consent to any suggestion permits another to mediate information into ones mind, where one holds into during circular thinking (logic), which outwardly turns into conflicts of reason against others.
IM + EN implies "within" one...not the suggested "immediate environment" outside of one. Only oneself can see through this deception, because anything another suggests comes from outside self.
KNOW (perceivable) sets FREE (perception)...truth/treowð - "faith; pledge, covenant" binds one to one another.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/truth
Notice also...truth/deru - "be firm, solid". Being implies form (life) within flow (inception towards death). Truth tempts form to pledge to other form (Jesus Christ), while ignoring flow (God).
That pledge of faith implies religion aka RE (to respond) LIGO (to bind)...
Je suis (I am)...why would I AM say I AM? Because...
https://genius.com/Gloria-gaynor-i-am-what-i-am-lyrics ...produced by... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Diamond
...and yet the mind holds onto the truth, while blinding ones outward sight inwardly.
Also...necessity was before heart comes into being. It's inception opening and death closing necessity for each ones life within.
Using IS implies a synthesis between suggestion and consent, which when consented to...makes distinction unrecognizable.
Nature WAS perceivable before a being within can suggest what it IS to one another.
Is implies vs isn't...there's the "lack of". One cannot suggest what anything is without implying what it isn't. It's suggestion which conjures consent into a lack of aka into nihil-ism (nihilo; nothing).
Relate/relatus - "to carry back" hence carrying suggested information back from perceivable inspiration, while tempting the consent of another to burden self with it.
It's the -ism which shapes a suggestion out of perceivable re-lat-ion aka action carrying back (inception towards death) reaction (life).
Society/sekw - "to follow"...life can only follow opening (inception) towards closing (death), which life needs to resist the wanted temptation of.
Follow aka to fall low...how about: "Rising High Rising High let your will fly high".... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imR_Sbkjq84
Are you sure you werent just debating yourself?
This is kinda what I was talking about the other day with the AI, it kept bringing up Cognitive dissonance.
Its not like we, or I dont suffer from it either. Sometimes its hard to let go of an idea after you believed in it for so long.
But I think thats what separates "conspiracy theorist" like us, with normys like your friend. We try to not let these ideas conflict with us, but instead try to understand more to figure it out.
When someone is in this state, it doesnt matter what you say, in my experience. Theyve already closed their minds off.
I left appalachia because of all the closed minds, only to discover that mainstream society is even worse. Ive also noticed that kids and young people are usually the most open and receptive. Older people tend to be very static and stereotypical of that saying.
You cant teach an old dog new tricks.
This is the only meaningful distinction between people when it comes to arguments. It's not a matter of knowledge, facts, IQ. You can't make a person see something if he doesn't want to. It's a moral problem really.
Now ask AI why it would bring up a contradiction...
Nothing (not) vs everything; like vs dislike; plural (we) vs singular (I); do vs don't...that's the cognitive dissonance aka contra (against) diction (to speak) within your mind.
Only letting go of both sides relieves ones self imposed suffering...
Every time it's easier to hold onto, because that's the path of least resistance during motion.
CON (together) + SPIRO (to breathe)...others CON one into ignoring that breathing implies separation.
We vs they; everything vs nothing (not); us vs them...three conflicts within half a sentence about trying to avoid conflicts.
Circular thinking (logic) turning into conflict (reason) closes ones mind off from implication (if/then) aka linear progression.
Because young memory hasn't received much old information yet. Holding onto information within memory ages it faster, while spoiling memory with the rotting fruit of forbidden (suggested) knowledge (perceivable).
Forbid aka for (forwards) + bid (to ask) implies being forwarded within perceivable inspiration, while asking for suggested information.
Fruit/frui - "to use"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/fruit not misusing by holding onto it.