"God having a comet do it" is as much explanatory power as the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis. Plus I have lots of data on the shelf about how he did it hydrogeologically, but I'm trying to avoid Gish gallops. Better for me to remind you that the Sphinx has water damage, which fits neatly with it being originally prediluvian.

They both are catastrophism, yours is cyclical, mine is unique.

All known theories violate the laws of physics in one place or another, all scientists admit their theories are incomplete. Look at the article I linked on VSL and ask why there are several peer-reviewed theories and the subject keeps coming up due to incompleteness in the standard model.

Anyway, your ordinary retort is not how I proposed the debate. I asked if you'd like to prove me wrong, which is not done with claiming I have nothing, because I could just go on with the things I have. Also there's no reason for you as a Christian to take your ordinary approach against a Christian topic, very botlike. (If humanity is millions of years old, death didn't come into the world by one man Adam, which makes Jesus's power to be supersessionist very sketchy.) As long as you're having fun with it and people are informed and you're pretending to try to prove me wrong ....

Actually, because when you line out the data they all point to the same event, so it's like 15 bad guesses and 1 lucky guess. But it would be better to start a different post on that because it's not about billions of years.

This is about proving OP wrong. OP has evidence, you don't. You're being dilatory. Feel free to keep trying not to though, you might get a lot of sheqalim out of this thread if I keep playing.

My friends have learned to hate asking me to watch movies. I hope this isn't one you asked me to watch before. I'll get a tab open for future reference with no guarantees.

Similar but not cyclical because there was only one. However, even your theory of cyclical catastrophism affirms OP in the range of thousands of years rather than billions, in part because geologists can't figure out how to tweak climate data older than that threshold of about 200,000 years.

One tremendous issue is that a single catastrophe is an extinction-level event and there would be no reason to presuppose that most all species would survive, so if there are catastrophes every 10,000-20,000 years or so then there's no way life would survive for 4 billion years. If there were even 16 catastrophes survival of any life would be absurd. A single catastrophe though, when it's testified similarly by every culture in the world, hundreds of traditions of global flood from which only a few humans and animals were saved by God's grace and inspired labor, does agree with the evidence. [It's not necessary for me to debunk your claim of mountains of evidence for the whole tenuous chain (Younger Dryas correctly dated to 12,000 years ago?, Younger Dryas caused by comet impact?, similar comet impact like clockwork every grand precession?); they do not go against OP. However, I will volunteer that most geologic climate data comes from ice cores, and studies show these are very unreliable in terms of counting years by granularity of data: when the granularity changes the age of the ice core can double or worse. So that gauntlet has already been taken up.]

The extinction likelihood is why the evolution cabal totally rejects all global catastrophism, because their plan calls for 4 billion years of unextinguished life, without any sentient protector.

For reference, the 16 catastrophes proposed by Randall Carlson in the video are as follows. The last one dates correctly with Noah's flood, and the rest (more irregular than I remember) rely on uniformitarian assumptions. I haven't run them personally but have seen the types of assumptions by which geologists make these claims, so I don't anticipate that further research will surprise me (nor is it related to OP).

1. 144000 BP Salian climate shift

2. 120000 BP Alika 2 megaslide & tsunami Hawaii

3. 117000 BP terminal substage SE climate shift

4. ~104000 BP Greenland blitz

5. ~84000 BP Odderade event & Osis 21

6. 72000 BP Toba super eruption near extinction of humans

7. 65000 BP Heinreich event 6

8. 52000 BP Heinreich event 5 Osis 14, 15

9. 40000 BP 1st phase Australian megafauna extinction

10. 39000 BP Heinrich event 4

11. 26000 BP final extinction of Australian megafauna

12. 26000 BP onset of late Wisconsin ice age

13. 23000 BP Heinrich event 2

14. 12900 BP onset of Younger Dryas climate catastrophe

15. 10000 BP end of Wisconsin ice age

16. ~4320 BP Burkle crater event & tsunami? (Noah's flood?)

Yeah, I don't watch 2-hour videos without some plan or reason. I mean at all. I'm weird that way, especially seeing as I'm willing to write a single post over 2 hours.

1. Monad just means unity. Yahweh declares himself to be unity.

2. Gnostic and mystic revelations never agree with each other so they cannot be used as proof that something is higher than Yahweh.

3. I wouldn't take Bentov for anything: e.g. to say the (modern) 22 Hebrew letters are energy patterns is completely ignorantof the (paleo) 22 Hebrew letters that Moses actually used.

4. The Sefer Yetzirah is very short, and is in the mishnaic period so very old; it has some nice poetic statements about the 22 letters (you could add 10 vowels) as tools of God's creation that could be used as indications of fundamental patterns, but these work best by their ordinary methods of conveying meaning, as their use for secret codes is limited.

5. Ein Sof is an attempt to use a name to describe the unnamed (it means "unlimited"), so it falls short; really any attribute of God falls short of describing him, so we must always defer to him being more than we can conceive, and the attempt to make Ein Sof a "highest" name above all others fails because it becomes just another name like God or Infinite or Creator, or in fact Monad.

Also, u/Thisisnotanexit, since he is calling my pinging spam I don't need to ping him anymore. (My thoughts would be that comments with no beneficial value that contain disrespect, attack, bad report, exceptionally low quality, disruption, evidence of stalking, repeated unsolicited matter, misleading statement, violence, or abuse would be deleted by the mod(s); so such a comment is obviously a bad report (and disruptive via its repetition), as it reports a comment that has effort and value.) But if he posts something for public comment I continue to reserve the right to take such a post as a solicitation. At that point I might get to tell him some changes that might get him in better stead with the community. As it stands, it seems there's no need to interact with most of his contribs, or even to downvote them (because he may be claiming cash value from the downvotes), similarly as with other problematic accounts, if I'm upvoting the things around them for contrast. But that's all with the theory that we might attempt for a time to see a moderated community with a committed neo-Nazi that actually has the guts to be honest about having his fascism tested and to work toward being the best Nazi he can be instead of some larper. God can redeem anyone, even Nazis.

"Trust but verify" means even as we extend as much grace as we can we also prepare for the worst. In this case there's not much to worry about. Admin acts fast if there are true issues (the Indian-larping accounts do not seem to have resurfaced); we can presumably get consensus on moderation and admin approval; the community rolls with the punches and, despite having lots of anarchs, doesn't have serious fragmentation. There are bursts of 100 comments in 1-2 hours, which I grant does make it hard to scan comment feed; that's the worst of the inconveniences of this inconsideration. Ordinary moderation is equal to these. With the forum goal being fair transparent future I don't think the present problems or the future potential problems are too serious that they will overcome that goal. But I probably should respond to less bait so as to help quiet things down.

The first sentence is dead-on established by evidence.

There's not a lot of value in his motive being burial, but your more generic reference to breaking up the power of building unity is backed by evidence.

Those who want to advance the discussion are very capable of avoiding the sliding and distraction. I suppose infiltrators might believe analysis might show that spamming is "good enough" to dissuade lurkers from first impressions of a board and also confuses the larger middle enough not to concentrate on (and contribute to) the critical mass of advancing discussion. So it's a theory.

Occasionally u/JosephGoebbel5, like prior accounts in that name, will post a meme that is not collectivist and can spark conversation. If "no collectivism" were a rule here he would lose the majority of his posts (not speaking of changing rules here, just of his treatment in fora that do have that rule). Of the minority, some are not really about conspiracy, but some are balanced enough for questioning cabal behavior (most often Jewish via his selectivity).

Sometimes he's shown ability to adjust style to get continuing permission to post, but he's also got a sort of inevitability cloud about him that it's not a matter of if but when he breaks the rules. Game theory indicates to me that the best approach is to continue very patiently applauding what's within the lines and (if we have a mod) quietly and professionally deleting what isn't. Then the community will have given him benefit of the doubt as far as it could stand.

There's no evidence that anyone else would be continuing the problem described in OP. u/RealWildRanter is a sincere Catholic and his support is accordant. u/WeedleTLiar is new to me but balanced at least as often as not.

If the community were to look for others that back up problematic lead accounts, I daresay there would be more evidence of the likelihood of others causing the same problem as the lead. But I'm a bit lazy about getting numbers to back up my impression right now.

Breaks c/Conspiracies rules with meta posting

The rule is about excessive, unnecessary, or bullying meta posts, not about single responsible neutral meta posts.

Would you like to know who is responsible for the most excessive, unnecessary, or bullying meta posts?

I appreciate your providing the reference. Oddly, the first item is the modern Russian Thunder Stone, the second is the Ramesseum 1000t with a credible documented sea transport explanation, and only the third is Baalbek 800t that is regarded as a bit mysterious. So the ancients were able to move and document a larger stone than Baalbek and yet you're still using the argument from ignorance.

Heh heh, Ruprechtsberger reports that the 1000t Stone of the Pregnant Woman at Baalbek, which was never moved from its quarry, is associated with a legend that nobody knew how to get it out of the quarry. So I guess there really was a limit after all.

Sounds like you were indoctrinated into believing that light has been traveling towards us for billions of years, so much so that you independently created what you would regard as the primary go-to theory of a person opposed to that view. It is true that light trails were an attempted explanation. But my thinking you were referring to the past attempts instead of inventing something fresh doesn't indicate that what I put forward was the hoax when it doesn't refer to or require it.

However, until recently, there was no assumption that starlight would necessarily contradict the earth's evidences of age in the thousands of years. Rather, it might interest you, Edgar Allan Poe put forward one of the first proofs that the universe had a finite boundary: the stars do not go on in distance forever since otherwise they would flood the night sky with light. This was judged as being a proof of recent creation and came long before lightspeed had been settled as a standard. So if you wanted to try to prove old earth by establishing your apparent predilection for long travel, feel free.

Yeah, that's the quote I was looking for!

"Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common .... We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity."

So Hitler wasn't a socialist who wanted to take property away from some and award it in the name of justice to another class, instead he was a socialist who wanted to take property away from some and award it in the name of justice to another class.

Or, in short, those other statists did it wrong but I won't.

The entire field of geology was built upon an assumption of catastrophism until the Darwin takeover I described that led to the suppression of evidence other than uniformitarianism as I described. Yet there are still plenty of godly geologists out there and plenty of discoveries of young-earth evidence. Do you want to play geologic column roulette?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Variable_speed_of_light&oldid=1314727386

If you want to compare "CDK" against "dark energy" on equal footing, that might be a fun argument. Would you like me to preclude the argument with my initial impression, or would you like to try to pursue the discussion productively?

I asked for evidence of this "razor" standard, evidence of analysis of this impossibility of movement. I didn't go long on engineering so I'm not prepared to argue (as you apparently are) that particular ideas are possible or impossible when they seem sufficiently plausible. Evidence, now there'd be an interesting discussion, rather than (checks notes) argument from ignorance.

So there would be no reason for a comment with u/Kaarous saying "he was a ... Project 2025 author" to have been deleted, so you'd have the link handy to copy, right?

And Unscored should have two copies of the archive at c/feminism that you can link in this unmoderated community, right?

A quick search shows nothing surprising to me, so I don't know what post you're working from. I'm also not tracking how a theory about Kaarous's alleged claims or their followup would be more credible than any other antinatalist theories. Do you actually want me to play fetch and guess the right conversation and then (likely) tell you it's not what you think? By pleading that you're afraid to give receipts yourself?

Sounds to me like Imp hated P2025 long ago and that hate has morphed into an attempt to continue to discredit anything remotely connected, to the point of breaking sitewide policy. That's an inference to the best explanation. Why should I believe otherwise?

I have plenty of evidence in reserve, that's why I made it in the form of a post I don't care about the progress of. The question I ask is whether there is any opposed evidence in reserve.

That's prima facie false even before we look at records like Job 40-41. Dragons are clearly very large scaled reptiles like tyrannosaurs and apatosaurs.

Inb4

Good for you! Did you want to discuss how lightspeed decay was developed by many as an alternative explanation to overcome the mainstream's failure to address the horizon problem of homogeneity across the universe?

Earthworks, ramps, rollers (of course they had wheels), wedges, team ropes, etc.

They're better than the opposition in currency, history, and quality.