Linkage: 7 March, 2017 #TheTriggering
Don’t forget kids, #TheTriggering happens on Twitter this week. Thursday, 9 March, 2017. Log in and Trigger some SJWs.
Meanwhile. Speaking of social media.
Does anyone fucking listen when I tell you to stop relying on social media, CenshorshipTube and Google to get your message out and to GET YOUR OWN FUCKING WEBSITE? No. Apparently you don’t. Then I have to hear your fucking whining.
I’ll give you money when you get your own fucking website.
Like a fucking grown up.
Tucker then asked Nye a simple question about climate science. He asked how much of the warming is caused by human activity. Nye’s entire ego depended on knowing whether human activity is contributing to climate change in a big way, a medium way, or a small way. Tucker wanted some details. How much difference do humans make? After all, Nye had said this was settled science. Tucker just wanted to know what that settled science said.
Nye didn’t know. And by not knowing that simple answer about the percentage of human contribution to warming – the only issue that really mattered to the topic – he proved in public that his opinions on science are not based on facts or knowledge.
Nye tried and tried to dodge the question, but Tucker was relentless. That was the trigger. Nye could plainly see, thanks to Tucker’s simple question, that his belief in science was just a belief, because he didn’t actually know the science. When your self-image and ego get annihilated on live television, you can’t simply admit you have been ridiculous all along. Your brain can’t let you do that to yourself. So instead, it concocts weird hallucinations to force-glue your observations into some sort of semi-coherent movie in which you are not totally and thoroughly wrong. That semi-coherent movie will look like a form of insanity to observers.
Look for Nye to go totally mental in the last minute of the clip, changing the topic to political leaks for no apparent reason. That’s your tell. His brain just sort of broke right in front of you.
As many others have documented, Twitter throttles back the tweets of people who hold political views they don’t like.
Most of you have freedom of speech. I have it too, in a Constitutional sense. But in terms of social media – the dominant form of political communication in our culture – I have about 5-10% as much freedom of speech as other people.
In my case, that’s all I need.
It just takes longer.
And I do like a challenge.
That’s why I am building my own podcasting studio in my home. I’ll be spreading my creative content across multiple platforms to try and claw-back my freedom of speech.
No really. I mean it. Get off the social media. Being exposed to fake news and censorship isn’t going to make you life better or happier.
Chelsea’s tweet exchange is representative of the debate illusion around the country. It goes like this:
Believer: Climate scientists are correct because the scientific method is reliable over time, thanks to peer review. The experts are overwhelmingly on the same side.
Skeptic: The prediction models are not credible because prediction models with that much complexity are rarely correct.
Believer: You troglodyte! You know nothing of science! The scientific method is credible!
See what happened? The believer was discussing science and the skeptic was NOT discussing science. These are different conversations.
The prediction models are designed by scientists, but they are not “science” per se, any more than a microscope is “science.” Both are just tools that scientists use.
With just how low Western women have gone these days, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that female teachers are no exceptions—being in a position of teaching doesn’t suddenly make them morally upstanding. Really, why would anyone want their children to be taught by these women? Are we to believe that a woman who spent her entire adult life drinking and partying to suddenly become a mentor for our sons and daughters? If you can’t turn a whore into a housewife, the same is doubly true for those trying to pass off as educators.
. . . . .
The truth is that most female teachers don’t have any passion for teaching. They just want an easy and secure government job that will elevate their sense of self-importance.
If you ever observe them in classrooms, you’ll know that they have no standards and enjoy texting and chatting on their phones during their class time. To them, it is the status of being a teacher that matters, not the substance of what that they can deliver to their pupils. These teachers don’t encourage independence and free thought and they’re not interested in letting students inquire and learn on their own; they’re more interested in having them do as they’re told as passive subjects in a controlled environment.
. . . . .
It is clear that many women are not capable of handling the slightest stress that comes with teaching and maintaining a class. When I was in high school, I once had a female teacher walk out of the classroom and not return. This didn’t happen because the students were being dicks, but because she was getting too stressed and overwhelmed from… grading quizzes.
Like most “strong and independent” women usually do, female teachers focus more on maintaining an outside shell and a facade of competence than delivering excellence.
http://www.returnofkings.com/113589/8-reasons-why-american-women-are-terrible-teachers
Mika Brzezinski: “Well, I think the dangerous edges here are that he’s trying to undermine the media, trying to make up his own facts, and it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he could control exactly what people think…and that is our job.”
. . . . .
Trump: [to other reporter] “Go ahead.”
CNN Fake News: “MR. PRESIDENT SINCE YOU’RE ATTACKING US CAN YOU GIVE US A QUESTION!”
Trump: [to CNN] “No.”
Trump: [to other reporter]: “Go ahead.”
CNN Fake News: “MR. PRESIDENT ELECT! MR. PRESIDENT ELECT! SINCE YOU ARE ATTACKING OUR NEWS ORGANIZATION,”
Trump: [to CNN] “No, not you.”
Trump: [to other reporter] “Go ahead.”
CNN Fake News: “CAN YOU GIVE US A QUESTION,”
Trump: [to CNN] “Not you.”
CNN Fake News: “GIVE US A CHANCE! MR PRESIDENT”
Trump: [to CNN] “Your organization’s terrible.”
CNN Fake News: “CAN YOU GIVE US A CHANCE, JUST LET US ASK…”
Trump: [to CNN] “Your organization’s terrible.”
CNN Fake News: “LET US ASK A QUESTION, SIR! SIR!”
Trump: [to CNN] “Quiet.”
This goes on for literally 25 seconds, before Trump finally becomes visibly angry and proclaims:
Trump: [to CNN] “You are fake news.”
http://www.returnofkings.com/115582/5-examples-of-cnns-fake-news
Journalist and independent Pizzagate researcher David Seaman confirmed a hacker entered the C3P website which contained protected sections with downloadable files, needing a key to enable access.
He discovered that the files referred to as “cheese pizza” contained child pornography. No matter how incriminating, this element would be rejected in court as it was obtained illegally. It would also be illegal to store those pedo-pornographic images even to show them as evidence to the authorities.
The important is not what you know to be true, but what you can prove.
. . . . .
Ben Swann of CBS is one of the only reporters of the Mainstream Media that had the minerals to tackle and fact check the Pizzagate. Shortly after his famous segment, he was taken off the air by the channel, leaving thousands wondering why he vanished after airing such a viral story.
The primary difference men and women is that men half-expect a mostly depreciating asset (a woman), whereas women hold out for a hopefully appreciating asset (a relationship with a male). A man’s evaluations are based on looks and fertility, as contrasted with a woman’s choice of earning capacity, physical prowess, and social status. But make no mistake, both men and women are purchasing a product each and every time.
What men outside this site of ours fail to understand is that the biggest used car salesmen in the world are really saleswomen selling themselves for relationships.
A used car can either be an unattractive woman talked up as a hottie or a good-looking girl whose nice exterior hides beaten-up, unreliable parts. Yet even those of us who took the red pill long ago can benefit from assessing women like the man buying a car.
When it comes to women, you should only opt for a girl you can safely say is new or like-new. Anything less does not deserve your time, let alone cohabitation or a ring down the track.
http://www.returnofkings.com/115218/why-are-men-paying-new-car-prices-for-used-women
If you have watched Idiocracy, especially the first minutes of the movie, you know what genetic deterioration is. The problem reached scientists’ awareness in the nineteenth century: as modern technology saved and healed people who would have been selected off on earlier times, wasn’t modern civilization undermining itself?
Individuals and peoples are not equally excellent at creating and maintaining a civilization. When the least able breed more than the excellent, civilization is at risk of being overrun with idiots who will dumb it down to their level if not destroying it altogether. Genetic deterioration can take other forms, such as when people with genetic disease are allowed to breed and, if they do, propagate it through the next generation.
Incidentally, this idea is also relevant when considering various groups inhabiting the same territory: if some groups breed more than others, the latter are at risk of being replaced or swamped down by the former.
This theme became taboo at the same time than eugenics got massively smeared—by the same who would distort and curse the idea of race a few decades later. If interested, take a look at Richard Lynn’s books Dysgenics (1996) and Eugenics, a reassessment (2001) that give a fine introduction to the topic.
Part of a man’s arsenal is detailed towards defending his home. The pistol is a good thing to carry while out and about, and it makes a good nightstand decoration. The rifle is for hunting and controlling a field or a street.
The shotgun, however, occupies the place in between, and today we are going to talk about the very thing you want to be holding when you yank open your front door to confront whatever hell has deposited itself on your front yard: the combat shotgun.
What is a combat shotgun?
As our readers will no doubt recall from previous articles, the shotgun itself shares common roots with the rifle as both were, at one time, the same weapon. A smooth-bore musket would fire whatever you wanted down the bore, whether that be a single ball, or a pile of shot. Once rifling was developed, the idea of a single projectile took precedence over some shot, and the shotgun stayed smoothbore entirely until much later, with the advent of dedicated slug guns.
Modern shotguns developed alongside rifles with the introduction of cartridges to replace muzzleloading around the end of the Civil War, and smokeless powder to replace black powder. As these technologies evolved, certain shotguns were modified for close-up, non-hunting use.
http://www.returnofkings.com/114920/an-introduction-to-the-combat-shotgun
Discover more from Cynical Libertarian Society
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Comments
Linkage: 7 March, 2017 #TheTriggering — No Comments
HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>