Wednesday, October 10, 2018

That moment you realize they're crazy

There is a story about Terence McKenna, upon being introduced at a conference by an academic who kept going on about the epic drug-taker's amazing metaphors concerning other-dimensional elves, standing up and angrily shouting, "It's not a metaphor! The elves are real!" At which point everyone in the audience suddenly realized that the famous techno-philosopher was not brilliant, he was not insightful, and his thinking was neither revolutionary nor creative, he was just crazy.

Owen Benjamin - by the way, you guys were right, the man is extremely funny - appears to have had a similar epiphany about the intellectual frauds known as Jordan Peterson and the rest of the New York Times-christened "Intellectual Dark Web". From the transcript:
Brett Weinstein comes out swinging. I was saying WeinSTINE, they were saying it was WeinSTINE. They're such fucking little weasels. When Brett was on Rogan, they said it was WeinSTINE instead of STEEN, but that was blatantly because of Harvey. Now they're all saying WeinSTEEN. Bunch of fucking weasels. The Intellectual Douche Weasels. IDW. Intellectual Douche Weasels.

For those of you who are like, "oh, you're turning on your own, Big Bear," no, I'm not. I'm using criticism and social shame to try to alter someone's behavior. I am not taking anyone's rights or calling for anything.

Brett Weinstein says "Quite a good discussion of some IDW-" That's Intellectual Douche Weasel. The Intellectual Dark Web, what a bunch of fags. All right, "reactions to the Kavanaugh confirmation and push-back. Warning, contains nuance. You may be triggered. If you are, avoid social media for 24 hours. Comfort and herb tea are available free of charge at a local safe space."

These people. I can't believe I was once rooting for them. That's all right. See, that's a mistake I expect you to get past with me. I made a mistake, I said you can trust a guy like Brett Weinstein to give pushback from a liberal stance and that's how you can come up with the best- no! These people are undercutting the American republic and they can go fuck themselves. Don't listen to a word out of their mouths.

I'm asking you to do that out of consent, by the way. I'm not forcing anyone or condemning or "taking down". That's so stupid. This is Charlie's reaction, by the way, when I told him what Jordan Peterson has been up to. He hasn't been taking it very well. You know, he looked up to him almost like a father figure and now he doesn't even want to clean his room! He's just throwing his toys everywhere... he's spiralling.

By the way, you're the one who cleans your room. It has nothing to do with Jordan Peterson. Everybody just needs a better Dad. That's what it comes down to. The Baby Boomers sucked at being parents and so now no one knows what money is or how the government works.
What's interesting to me about the Official Opposition's sudden reaction to Jordan Peterson's massive faux pas is the way they are desperately trying to reinforce his false "thought experiment" narrative.  What a great nuanced discussion! It's just a thought experiment that demonstrates how nuanced and thoughtful ol' Uncle Jordan is! He didn't actually mean what he said. LOL! Don't you know he just works out what he thinks in public? He's been thinking about this issue for a long time, a long time, but he's just working out what he thinks about it now in response to your reaction to his tweet, which you must understand was just a nuanced thought experiment that struck him amidst his contemplation on how best to clean someone else's room.

No, it's an extremely significant demonstration of how little character and integrity these weasels possess, as they join forces in order to cover up for Jordan Peterson's mask slipping in public and revealing the real anti-American left-wing globalist face underneath. In fact, the main thing I took from all of this was the confirmation that Scott Adams is not on our side, after he rushed to accept the Crazy Christ's "clarification".

Think about this. Did Milo ever get this kind of protective public insulation for his public missteps? Did they ever extend the same benefit of the doubt to Kavanaugh or anything that President Trump has ever said? The Incestuous Douche Weasels know, they immediately recognized, that Peterson exposed himself badly on Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, and anyone who falls for this frantic ex post facto itachi kabuki is a self-deluded fool.

It is simply ghastly to observe how many Peterson cultists continue to delude themselves about the man, even after they saw him unmask himself. They have the situation precisely backwards. Peterson didn't take one bad position after establishing many good ones, to the contrary, he very publicly took one good position early on that is very much against the flow of his entire personal and professional perspective.



Blogger JACIII October 10, 2018 5:39 AM  

Scott Adams has let the mask slip quite a bit lately. Kavanaugh confirmation caused the "PULL BACK! You went to far! Don't encourage them to actually win on anything!" order to go out to the IDW stalking horses. There is real fear.

Blogger Rhys October 10, 2018 6:00 AM  

I knew from the moment I got into this, that once we actually get some real, substantial wins, we will see people who are our "allies" showing their true colors.

Blogger qualitycontrol October 10, 2018 6:14 AM  

This Weinsteen/Weinstein thing screams creep to me. I wonder if my instinct is correct.

Blogger Jamie-R October 10, 2018 6:31 AM  

Pretty funny when he weighs in on something as consequential as the determining Supreme Court judge & is like, yeah, I'm totally a liberal on this. His media handlers that made him go viral would be a bit upset by it. To ingratiate yourself on the Right, you have to play a strong hand, it's much like how the Alt-Media figures unbanned on Twitter went after Q. I guess it was their demographic to sway, but it showed how charlatans are everywhere for, as Cartman would say, that Jew Gold.

Blogger Charles Martel October 10, 2018 6:37 AM  

Scott Adams has daily periscope sessions that Openmind later posts on his Youtube channel.
I urge you to take the time and listen to what he has to say as it is well worth it.

For one, if you are highly intelligent and sometimes have trouble understanding how average people "think" ( I use the term loosely), his persuasion filter and techniques will help you get a better grip on why the masses do what they do and often ignore facts, logic and reason.

But the greatest thing about listening to Scott Adams is that he unwittingly provides you a window into the warped mind of privileged liberals and delusional baby boomers like himself.

Everything is there: from "relative truth" to the sheer denial of evil to excusing every bad behavior because "they meant well" or because "we live in a simulation" etc.

His periscopes are a daily reminder of what a heap of sub-human scum liberal baby boomers are and why when the time comes people like Scott Adams and Jordan Peterson should not be shot but tortured and burnt alive instead.

Blogger rognuald October 10, 2018 6:53 AM  

Scott Adams job is to nudge Trump supporters to the Left.

Blogger ar10308 October 10, 2018 6:54 AM  

Owen's recent Red Pilling on JBP has been very compelling to watch. Coming from Hollywood, Owen knows a lot of inside baseball and points out some very pertinent facts that aren't well know about the man, such as which talent Agency Jordan Peterson happens to be with.

Peterson is apparently represented by the CAA, which happens to be one of the most powerful talent agencies in all of Hollywood. They represent a ton of Hollywood-powerful people. Owen used to be rep'd by them, but fell out of favor when he wouldn't bend the knee on giving hormone blockers to 5yos.
I guess they don't find Peterson similarly threatening.

Blogger basementhomebrewer October 10, 2018 7:01 AM  

Benjamin is interesting. He is on a path and he is slowly sounding more and more like Vox. Shortly after his comments about Peterson he made a podcast where he talked about how "evil mirrors evil" meaning evil accuses you of the things it is doing (sound familiar). The extended explanations and metaphors he makes are just different enough that I don't think he was ripping off Vox, but I could be wrong.

He then, in the same podcast, declares that he used to be anti-nationalism but now he is a staunch nationalist. This is significant because his anti-nationalist views came from paling around with Shapiro and Crowder. He has bucked both of them on this issue, but he still goes on to praise Shaprio in the same podcast.

That specific podcast was interesting to watch because it is clear he is trying to find his way to the truth. He still hasn't figured somethings out but he shows he is willing to contradict his friends in the effort to arrive at the truth.

Blogger Durandel October 10, 2018 7:03 AM  

@BA 117 - There is no “persuasion filter”. Scott Adams is just a less annoying used car salesman selling half truths about human behavior and persuasion for shekels so that he can avoid blowing through all that Dilbert money living in one of the most expense places in the USA.

His only positive is he doesn’t try very hard to cover up that he is a con man because he knows there are plenty of suckers who’ll follow him even when he is caught out as wrong. He just admits it, pivots, redirects your attention, and then claims he was really for the opposite all along and the NPCs eat it up.

Even back in 2016, when Adams was considered “our guy”, I couldn’t watch him more than 10 minutes because of the salesman schtick.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 10, 2018 7:04 AM  

Yeah. Owen Benjamin has been against the IDW from the start, he was included in it, walked away from it and called it "gay." He had a video out months ago (I don't know exactly when because I saw it on twitter) where he mocks the IDW for being for free speech except certain words, statements and actions. He also mocked them for being scared of Sam Harris, who he called their leader.

He has mocked Harris from the start. He mocks Darwin. Lately with his Jordan Peterson and Weinstein content it's looking like he'll enjoy reading the blog and benefit from it. Likewise, his jokes compliment your dialectic approach, so it's good for everyone when you both attack the same target.

I also have a suspicion that he has read Cuckservative. He made four comments in half a stream that were about things talked about in that book. It may be that he has just been absorbing a lot of your content though.

Blogger Charles Martel October 10, 2018 7:15 AM  

@Durandel: Missed my point entirely and failed to read my comment to the end :)

Blogger VFM 4388 October 10, 2018 7:16 AM  

A year or so ago, Benjamin made a video about how the Alt Right are Nazis and Nazis are bad. Some ilk (not me) linked him to the 16 points, and the next day he made a video saying if you want to be taken seriously, you have to give serious answers that make sense, and while he disagrees with the 16 points, you can't just call the Alt Right nazis any more.

Those were on his channel that Youtube took down.

Since then I've watched him slowly transform from "Identity Politics are only always ever a leftist plot" to "Vox Day is right again. That makes me sad. I hope he's wrong one of these times. But you have to pay attention to what he says because he doesn't lie."

He is careful to engage the actual argument and not a straw man and he publicly admits his error and changes his views when proven wrong. Last time I saw that was the early days of this blog, which is what caused me to stick around and eventually sell my soul to the dark one.

Blogger Krymneth October 10, 2018 7:20 AM  

There is a "persuasion filter", or at least, persuasion is a real thing that every serious person should learn about it, lest they be caught defenseless against someone who is good at it. And the world is full of both naturally persuasive con men and narcissists, and people who have studied it carefully for the purpose of controlling people.

But Scott has somehow raised it to a central organizing principle of philosophy and existence, which it can't sustain. It isn't that important. It's a philosophy as silly as "Sandpaper Based Carpentry"; it's not only not the only tool, it's not even the most important one. Nor is he necessarily the best place to learn it from, though he will point you at good resources for it.

Blogger tuberman October 10, 2018 7:22 AM  

Here's another approach, as in how many academics (professors) do you know that are sane? Sure there are some, but they are rare. The underlying contempt exuding from this academic crowd sets them up for speaking in gobblygook, and taking themselves seriously even when they are more then half a bubble off.

After the DNC and upper level cabal groups and their money is destroyed, next comes most of the schools and their gender groups to be taken down.

JP is an academic/gatekeeper making sure youth do not stray far.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 10, 2018 7:25 AM  

@4 Q made some unforced errors. AJ was pro Q until Q went anti AJ. There was no reason to do this, AJ was boosting Q's messages and stands for the same things.

Adams went anti Q for optics and got other people to be anti Q, this is different to AJ.

With each person that went anti Q, it's important to understand why rather than condemn them all for the same reason.


On Adams:

Pre election, he was helping convert people to Trump.
He was also spinning negative stories about Trump like you wouldn't believe.
(Seriously, when people felt black pilled they'd check out his blog to be told why this terrible thing was actually good.)

He also took a way bigger financial hit than he would've by going the other way. Yes, he could Fox News his competition, but he ended up gambling a lot on Trump winning the election because he couldn't extract himself out of the hole he had put himself in and the huge financial loss for predicting/analyzing without endorsing Trump surprised him.

Lately he is really trying for unity. That's why his reaction to Peterson's position is interesting.

Note, Adams knew his audience well enough to brace them for impact before he went pro BLM. He was also talented enough to brace them for impact.

Peterson seems to have been caught out by the echo chamber he walked into after he became friends with the Weinsteins. He didn't expect that one line tweet to go down that badly.

It makes Adams scarier in a way, because Adams wouldn't make that mistake, even if he wanted to articulate something that bad. Fortunately, Adams is just a boomer civ nat cuck rather than someone with anti Trump goals.

Blogger tuberman October 10, 2018 7:28 AM  

BTW, I agree that Scott Adams is a Lefty, and thrives on half-truths. Never trusted him, as he just uses snark to prove he's smarter than other Leftists (not too hard).

Blogger OGRE October 10, 2018 7:33 AM  

tuberman wrote:BTW, I agree that Scott Adams is a Lefty, and thrives on half-truths. Never trusted him, as he just uses snark to prove he's smarter than other Leftists (not too hard).

my sentiments exactly. Anybody who uses snark more often than rarely should be viewed very critically.

Blogger Durandel October 10, 2018 7:35 AM  

@BA 117 - I read it. I was agreeing with you.

Blogger Durandel October 10, 2018 7:38 AM  

@InfoMerchant - I don’t know. I can see your analysis being true, but my take was he was trying to ride a wave to make money off of it and he read wrong multiple times. I don’t think he’s as good as he thinks he is.

Blogger Durandel October 10, 2018 7:40 AM  

@Ogre and Tiberman - agree, which is why I hate Nietzsche, the original John Stewart.

Blogger T October 10, 2018 7:48 AM  

Yes I know it's OT, but as a midwit, I can't put my finger on why this smells to me.

Blogger Duke Norfolk October 10, 2018 7:58 AM  

basementhomebrewer wrote:Benjamin is interesting. He is on a path and he is slowly sounding more and more like Vox.

Interesting. I heard of OB when I was still listening to Tom Woods occasionally. He sounded like a pretty typical (right) libertarian (anti-racist, etc.), and thus I wasn't really interested.

I'm glad to hear he's unlocked from that and is drifting right. I may have to give him another listen.

Blogger Avalanche October 10, 2018 8:05 AM  

@5 "the greatest thing about listening to Scott Adams is that he unwittingly provides you a window into the warped mind of privileged liberals and delusional baby boomers like himself."

^^ This, oh SO this!!! ^^

Adams has actually got a good bit of 'JellyButter Peanut' going on: his bafflegarble starts out very (ha) "persuasive" ... and then as you listen further, you begin to realize he's an uneducated idiot -- or he's flat-out NUTS -- with his weird hidden-leftie / boomer misdirections. He was suggesting, not so long ago, that the Right needs to step back, calm down, quiet down, and then the Left "will" match us. That has never happened in history -- so why now?!

I had to quit listening - the 'not-actually subliminal' messaging got too grating.

Blogger Avalanche October 10, 2018 8:06 AM  

@7 "Owen used to be rep'd by them, but fell out of favor when he wouldn't bend the knee on giving hormone blockers to 5yos.
I guess they don't find Peterson similarly threatening."

"Take your meds" .... it's exactly what it says on the tin!

Blogger VD October 10, 2018 8:09 AM  

I can't put my finger on why this smells to me.

These two statements:

1. This seemed to be particularly the case for participants with more pro-life attitudes.

2. What’s more, this “my-side bias” was actually greater among participants with prior experience or training in logic.

The first indicates another "conservatives R dumb" bias. The second indicates that the syllogisms may have been poorly written. EG: one of the examples states "all foetuses are human beings", which is a confusing statement in this context. Does the set of "all foetuses" include canine foetuses or not? Strictly speaking, the statement is obviously false.

Blogger Avalanche October 10, 2018 8:18 AM  

@8 "his anti-nationalist views came from paling around with Shapiro and Crowder. He has bucked both of them on this issue, but he still goes on to praise Shaprio in the same podcast."

Reminds me of a lovely (Greek extraction) fellow who began attending what we jokingly called our 'hate dinners.' As he listened to us terrible haters discussing the truth and describing the machinations of our evil enemy/enemies... he began awakening. He had started waking up when he was abruptly fired for "racism" when he wasn't.... yet.

Intelligent fellow and, after some months 'ingesting hate' (and it SO wasn't! We were merely discussing the news and history.) every week at dinner, he came in one night and said: 'O.M.G.! I used to listen to Rush ALL the time -- and he's totally an Israeli agent! ALL his stuff is based in "is it good for the jews? Well, at least I still have the WSJ!"' (We all shared a private chuckle....)

A couple months later, he was "suddenly" on fire: 'ALL I can see now in the WSJ is the propaganda: it's ALL israeli/support the jews, go to war for the jews, send them more money, waste American lives for their purposes! It's ALL propaganda!' It was lovely watching him grow up in seeing.

THIS is a worthwhile effort for those too old for the front lines: awakening the normies, guiding their research, leading them to start down a path or two.

The wife of another friend (whom my late husband and I awoke, over some 5-6 years) is now reading here and at NeonRevolt; and watching PrayingMedic, and reading QMaps. OH! How she had resisted -- hates moslems with all her heart and would happily round them up and send them back; struggles with anti-black / pro-White racism.

Pick your students carefully and do a little shaking and awaking. Even if they don't join our 'army,' they may at least not hamper the army when it's time!

Blogger OGRE October 10, 2018 8:35 AM  

@25 VD

I was just reading that article as well. The examples of invalid arguments are worded in a very confusing manner, although the valid examples are pretty straight forward, which might explain the large discrepancy between accuracy for the valid vs invalid examples.

For instance, the invalid examples were all variations of the form

1. All X are Y
2. Some Y have property P.
3. Therefore, some of the things with property P are X.

If instead they used an example such as:

1. All X are Y.
2. Some Y have property P.
3. Therefore, some X have property P.

The error would be more obvious. It would also be less confusing simply using just objects (All X are Y, Some Y are Z) instead of introducing properties into the mix. As you say, it looks like the questions were designed to reach the desired conclusions.

Also, the truth of the premises isn't being looked at here, so "all foetuses are human beings" being obviously false doesn't affect the validity of the argument, which is whtas being judged here. But it does make judging the validity more difficult if people aren't instructed to ignore the truth of the premises and to focus solely on the validity of the argument form. So again, it suggests the researchers have used questions designed to illicit desired answers.

Blogger Damelon Brinn October 10, 2018 8:39 AM  

The only thing I've seen by Benjamin was the video he did about Gunn and Harmon and the sickness in Hollywood after Gunn's tweets were found. So many people were talking *about* them without actually showing them, which played into the narrative of "just a few jokes." They get away with a lot because decent people don't want to show what they do and even be that associated with it, but he was right that you have to if you want get past the media filter. Looks like I need to watch more of him.

I had enough of Adams 2-3 years ago when he wrote one of his "this article exists to show I can make you react the way you're reacting to this article" articles, and a bunch of people kept telling me I just didn't get how deep it was. Then during the campaign I would hear that he supported Trump, opposed Trump, predicted his win, predicted his loss, etc. And always the reminder that nothing he says is to be taken at face value, by definition. If I understand what postmodernism is, he's full of it.

That stuff probably would have impressed me when I was 15. Now it just makes me want to go throw a football around or run a chainsaw -- something concrete that men do.

Anonymous Anonymous October 10, 2018 8:47 AM  

It could be just me, but the phrase “tortured AND burned alive” looks somewhat redundant to me.

I would totally light the match, tho ....

Blogger Unknown October 10, 2018 8:56 AM  

Adams has created some great comics with Dilbert but has always struck me as being too much like those direct marketers who have email newsletters that always pitch one product or another in between some useful information. During the prez election, I enjoyed reading Adams because he was one of the few who understood Trump's persuasive ability. I have to give him credit for being willing to accept that the financial blowback was part of going against the narrative during the election.

However, I tuned out Adams when he made some off the cuff comment that he was becoming a fan of anti-white CA politician Ted Lieu because Lieu favors legalizing marijuana. If you are really going to side with anti white hate mongers just so you can safely smoke dope, then you aren't on our side. It is all just an act.

Blogger Jamie-R October 10, 2018 8:58 AM  

Q made some unforced errors. AJ was pro Q until Q went anti AJ. There was no reason to do this, AJ was boosting Q's messages and stands for the same things

You obviously don't pay attention or you're just another liar. Alex Jones made an effort to not mention Q, & employed on the side with no links to Infowars, Jerome Corsi, on you tube, in a pretty basic channel, to filter that message with longwinded 'decodes'. When Trump struck Syria, Alex Jones in a fit showed that his allegiances are elsewhere by cursing Trump. No one in the media can be trusted, because it's pretty obvious who has control of it, even the alt-types that try to differentiate themselves but find the same people through different channels leaning on them. Alex Jones is an entertainer, sometimes he mentions truth, but in the end, there is only one source that consistently tells the behind the scenes story. The only people that seem to have a problem with that are intel agencies overseas. Particularly Israel, but also the U.K.

Blogger Matthew McDaniel October 10, 2018 9:12 AM  

Don’t put too much faith in potheads.

Blogger Unknown October 10, 2018 9:20 AM  

Peterson does seem to have damaged himself with that ridiculous tweet.

On the other hand, the elves ARE real. Try some
DMT. You'll see what I mean.

McKenna was less crazy than he seems.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 10, 2018 9:28 AM  

@19 Ok, let's examine this.

He was trying to ride a wave - Ok, but we were in the Trump is a clown phase, so the wave wasn't big at all. The black singer who accused Corey of groping her, Candace Owens and other people who benefited from the wave showed up at the best time for what you're suggesting.

You're also suggesting that Scott Adams could predict the wave coming, which is his story. So this gives him honesty points, which is not a quality I associate with him at all.


He read wrong multiple times, sure. I'm not sure he'd have opened his mouth if he knew the backlash he'd get and there are plenty of times when he misreads the situation, he's human.

He's not as good as he thinks he is, but he's also not being honest about how good he thinks he is. He has declared multiple times that he could've made Clinton win instead of Trump. He's said it recently, he offered to be paid to do it during the election, it's not a one off comment.

The claim cannot be tested. I doubt he thinks he's as good as he says he is.
That said, he thinks he is influential enough to get either the Chinese government or the US government to kill some Chinese citizens for maybe playing a minor role in the death of his stepson.

The final point regarding money is that he doesn't actually need to make that much more of it, he mostly needs to keep what he has. From a purely political point of view, Trump will save him money and Clinton would've cost him money, notably the inheritance tax would've hurt him. Ignoring everything else, I think his wealth is somewhere in the $75-90 million range. If Clinton wanting to tax him up to $45 million for dying isn't a good reason to be pro Trump, I'm not sure what is. (He did mention that at the time. He endorsed Johnson using that excuse, he tried to explain keeping 25 cents of every dollar is enough to stop him endorsing Clinton.)

Blogger VD October 10, 2018 9:29 AM  

it does make judging the validity more difficult if people aren't instructed to ignore the truth of the premises and to focus solely on the validity of the argument form.

That was my point. And it makes it more difficult even if they are instructed to ignore the truth of premises, because being told to ignore something does not mean that one can do so.

Blogger VD October 10, 2018 9:33 AM  

He has declared multiple times that he could've made Clinton win instead of Trump.

He is absolutely wrong. Again.

Blogger Cylinder October 10, 2018 9:46 AM  

McKenna used the word elf to mean spirit rather than an entity in the Tolkien sense. At least McKenna stood for something even if it was literal sorcery. That's easier to respect than JBP's evasions.

Blogger OGRE October 10, 2018 9:50 AM  

@35 VD

yes true. Its very difficult to ignore a blatant error and then find the obfuscated one. ("Aha I found the problem! Now I can stop looking") And I know that was your point, I may not have made that clear.

Blogger Jack (LJCSOGHMOMAS) October 10, 2018 9:52 AM  

Scott Adams got a personal meeting in the White House with the GE, which only makes sense when you realize that Trump is a "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" kind of guy.

My biggest problem with Adams has always been that his fundamental worldview is nihilism. Humans are "moist robots" that can be programmed. He admires Trump as a manipulator, not as a warrior. Adams has no allegiance to higher values, and doesn't believe in truth, let alone Truth.

Blogger NO GOOGLES October 10, 2018 9:59 AM  

Scott Adams does have some insight into how persuasion works and one or two other things. But he is a used car salesman through and through. Hypnosis has nothing to do with why he knows what he knows, but it differentiates him and when people see that he was right about something, they start to think that maybe hypnosis isn't mostly nonsense - it's a technique to make them closer to Adams by giving them an out of the mainstream belief in common. Same thing with his constant reminding about how he was taking a hit to his career to post about Trump and "persuasion" topics. He was in the short term, but he was also building a core audience that he could rely on in the future.

To be fair, Scott Adams has always said that he's "not on a side" - he's pretty much the embodiment of the "big brained centrist" meme. He got a lot of credit (probably too much) for being one of the few who predicted that Trump would win early on.

E-celebs - not even once.

Blogger Colin Flaherty's baby mama October 10, 2018 10:02 AM  

What's funny is Peterless gets promoted as revitalizing masculine patriarchy when he is a weak halfaggot.
His feeble demeanor revealed him as dubious from the upstart, but we should all be grateful that Vox Day took on the gruesome task of meticulously intellectually eviscerating him. Grazie.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 10:05 AM  

I like this sort of thing, but part of me is embarrassed to address the Dark Whatnot. Because it's not a real thing and pretending it is even to dismiss it may be giving it too much credit.

I did, however, once photoshop some dark luminaries onto the faces of magicians in a still from Arrested Development where they "demand to be taken seriously." And threw in Steve Urkel for fun. They are a broad target for ridicule.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 10:27 AM  

@13- Philosophy is a rigorous discipline, and dabblers usually have no idea how much they don't know.

I visited Scott Adams' blog once, and he had a post attempting to debunk Occham's Razor. It became clear to me immediately that he hadn't read Occham and didn't know the razor as it was originally expressed. Not only that, but I don't think he even knew what a razor is.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 10, 2018 10:32 AM  

@31 Possibly the former as I don't watch AJ or read Q's stuff from source.

A google search (I know) provides plenty of claims (I know) that AJ was pro Q at one point, and the first anti AJ comment by Q that I read was the one in which Q claimed AJ is a fraud in response to AJ mentioning him.

Syria proves nothing. The vast vast vast majority of people didn't like that. Vox was one of the few that said "no big deal", but the Alt Right and Alt Lite was against that. CNN was kind enough to prepare a report on it. (The Cernovich with wine meme is from there.)

You have everyone from Stefan, PJW, Spencer opposing it and the only pro Trump guys that thought it was a good thing (not neutral, good) were neocons, so we had Bill Mitchell end up debating Stefan and was made a fool out of. (Whatever Trump does is fine with me, Putin should've started WWIII, it's ok when we do it but no one else can, bombing a country isn't an act of war, etc.)

Twitter polls from right wingers consistently had anti bombing Syria results.

Yes, AJ is an entertainer, he is more useful as a builder than a newsreader by far. But AJ has always been shouting "the deep state is bad."

Q is a poster(s) that says the deep state is bad.

It's stupid for one to provoke the other. They're equally credible to the left.

"one source that consistently tells the behind the scenes story"

AJ and Q both claim to do this. AJ has "sources from the very top levels" and Q is a source at presumably the very top level.

I don't blindly trust any behind the scenes story, yet I'm happy for them to tell anyone that'll listen that the deep state is bad because I thought that before I'd heard of either. Want to claim there are pedos in Hollywood? Fine, both do that too and I'm fine with it because Hollywood needs to be razed pedos or not.

I'm more than willing to be corrected on my original point, but your logic of AJ is bad because he opposed Trump going against his anti war campaign policy is terrible. AJ has always been anti war.

If Trump goes against his immigration policy, people will turn on him, as seen by his pro daca tweets.

Some people support Trump due to what he stood for and some people support Trump blindly, no matter what.

I'm definitely in the Molyneux camp over the Bill Mitchell camp. I will happily concede that Vox was right and the side freaking out were protesting a declaration of war that never came (although possibly they had some influence there) and the warmongering side wishing to fight Russia in Syria because chemical weapons were right not to throw their toys out of the pram, but foolish to swallow MSM chemical weapon BS.

Adams may have stolen his 2 day thing from Vox's "give the God Emperor 2 days before reacting."

Blogger InformationMerchant October 10, 2018 10:50 AM  

Ugh, nitpicking clarifications to the above:

"Q claimed AJ is a fraud in response to AJ mentioning him."

ie the thing I was reading said AJ [did or said something positive pro Q] and Q said AJ was a fraud.

"The vast vast vast majority of people didn't like that."

As in Alt Right and Alt Lite figureheads and suchlike. Actual poll results of just random nobodies ranged from 50%-66% opposition, but the actual figureheads rarely -liked- it and those that did were in the suicidal Assad because the MSM told them he was crazy mindset.

I've mentioned Vox's "calm down" response being correct, but remember Cernovich had an insanely long stream. He called Molyneux, Southern, Adams and a ton of other Trump supporters, it was a great show, but they were all against it.

Scott Adams had the best spin afterwards, that it was a fake punishment for a fake crime. But that was after the fact, when people had a chance to come around to what would actually be the fallout.

PJW was notably flouncy and honestly admitted as much. But Cernovich had correctly called that people on Trump's staff wanted troops in Syria, so many people were reacting to a new proxy war with Russia rather than what actually happened.


"You have everyone from Stefan, PJW, Spencer"

ie you have a range from the -Trump supporting- AnCaps, Libertarians, Alt Lite, Alt right, Fake Right, former Bernie supporters opposing it. The only people that weren't overwhelmingly opposing it were neocons that supported Trump.

Blogger Unknown October 10, 2018 10:52 AM  

Its been an interesting ride listening to both Vox and Owen at the same time and to have the gravity of their thoughts and beliefs pull them together until they finally meet. Vox to Owen - "you look much shorter on tv." Owen to Vox - "its ok here, take this blanket..." Legends, the both of ya.

Blogger SB Wright October 10, 2018 10:59 AM  

Can someone help me with the article "T" cited above, which VD and Ogre referenced? For the "Valid: Pro-choice" argument in Table 1, it states:

1) All women's rights should be supported
2) Some of women's rights are abortions
3) Some abortions should be supported.

I look at this and see "women's rights" wholly within the set of "rights [which] should be supported", and then "abortions" wholly within the set of "women's rights", and then think "all abortions should be supported" is the logical conclusion. When I read "some should be", I infer there may be some which shouldn't, which here isn't true from the syllogism. Is this example poorly written, or am I thinking about it incorrectly?

Blogger RobertT October 10, 2018 11:08 AM  

Too bad about Adams. I had him in my maybe/maybe not box for a long time, but this pretty well cements him in the opposition box. The problem is, he's poised to cause major damage right before midterms. I certainly hope Trump knows what he's doing, but I am getting nervous because nothing's happening and midterms are growing closer every day.

Blogger RobertT October 10, 2018 11:10 AM  

Actually, as Bannon says, this it not MIDTERMS, it's a RE-ELECTION. This election will set our course for the next century.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants October 10, 2018 11:29 AM  

Plz no bully-I know I'm not that smart but I've never been terribly impressed w/Scott Adam's. He has written some interesting posts, some funny posts, over the last 3 yrs, but he doesn't understand much about how politics really work, and I'm going to admit it here right now-Ive never "gotten" Dilbert. I've tried. I really have, but I honestly am bewildered by what's funny about it. I still don't know.
Adams to me is just your typical Centrist leaning Democrat that got left behind when the parties began to become more polarized and he realized he was too smart to become a SJW.
I don't hate him, I just don't care much, one way or another.

Blogger ghostfromplanetspook October 10, 2018 11:39 AM  

God forbid you have a supreme justice that ACTUALLY believes in his Christian values. "The dogma lives lively within you and that's a concern" Dianne Fienstein.

Blogger Durandel October 10, 2018 11:42 AM  

Finally had time to listen to the video linked. Right after Owen mentions that he got a chance to talk to Vox Day, he goes into watcher apologies sent to him where former Peterson fans who met with Peterson confirm much of what Vox has been saying about the man, especially the living in fear part.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants October 10, 2018 11:42 AM  

Pick your students carefully is really good advice. Otherwise, you can screw up like I did.

NormieCon Israel-loving Christian friend running for pol office-
"So, what should I be reading?"

Me- "Have you read Henry Ford, The Jewish Century by Sleskind, or Culture of Critique? If not, read those, ASAP."

*one week later*

Friend's posts on Twitter-"All Jews are going to Hell if they don't repent now," "John Pohoretz you should off yourself," "Jews just want never-ending wars for Israel."

I had no idea this could/would happen. Nearly a year later and HE doesn't want to be friends me with, (Feelings mutual at this point), because I won't light my own soc media accts on fire like he did.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants October 10, 2018 11:49 AM  

I made a 10K bet that Trump would win in Dec 2015, I don't see anyone beating down my door due to my AMAZING predictive powers. In fact, I've correctly picked the presidential outcome correctly since 1992, though I was really tossed up about the 2000 race. I didn't have confidence about it, but gave the W to Bush strictly because of the Clinton scandals.
But, guess what? So have millions of other ppl. I don't see how that makes Adams some great soothsayer, and I still hate Dilbert.

Blogger OGRE October 10, 2018 11:50 AM  

@48 SB Wright

You're right that the first two premises imply the conclusion of “All abortions should be supported.” But All also includes Some. So if “All abortions should be supported” is true, then so is “Some abortions should be supported.” Thus the argument form is valid in that case, in that the 2 premises imply the conclusion.

The issue is again language. Our language rules don't always line up with the rules of logic. In this case you inferred that “Some abortions should be supported” implied that “Some abortions should not be supported.” This would be a correct implication based on how we use such language, but its not a valid inference based on logic rules. The proposition “Some abortions should be supported,” if true, on its own would not imply either “All abortions should be supported” or “Some abortions should not be supported.” Theres not enough information to infer that. But because of how we use the word “Some” in our language its a valid inference based on our language rules.

This is very common with the use of “or” in logic and language. In logic “or” implies that at least one must be true; i.e. if (A or B) is true it implies that 1) A is true and B is false, 2) A is false and B is true, or 3) A is true and B is true. Its only false if both A and B are false. But in the way we use “or” in language it can often be implied that (A or B) is true only if one of A or B is true and the other is false.

I'd also add that the phrasing in the example argument you cited is very poor. “Some of women's rights are abortions” violates the language rules in that the plural of abortion would never be used in referring to the right to have an abortion; the plural form would only be used in referring to multiple instances of the act of aborting a fetus. By using the plural here it causes difficulty in understanding what is being said.

Its what VD and I were getting at, the poorly constructed example arguments obfuscate the actual structure of the argument forms and makes it more likely that a mistake will be made, and its quite likely that this was intentional in order to get a desired result.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 11:54 AM  

@54- Dr. Jelly Butter Peanut would tell you to read your Dostoyevsky. Pay special attention to the relationship between Ivan Karamazov and Smerdyakov. A little learning is a dangerous thing.

Blogger Phelps October 10, 2018 11:58 AM  

Context for the Scott Adams response:

One of his "rules" is that if someone says something that is instantly inflammatory, and they clarify by adding additional context within 24 hours, he will accept that context.

He generally points this to the right, but he keeps it as an objective rule (especially since feminists have a hard-on for him and take things out of context, so he wants the defense himself.)

This isn't a refutation of the arguments against SA in the thread, but just an alert that his "context accepted" isn't agreement or endorsement. It's just him laying down a marker for "I always do this" later down the road.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 12:00 PM  

It also depends on the referent of the word "All".
At any rate, as Ogre points out, the second premise "Some womens' rights are abortions" is an almost meaningless string of words in the English language. The only way it can even begin to serve the purpose is if we start substituting terms so we can arrive at the generic "Some X are Z", which is obviously how the moron who wrote this formulated the premise.

Blogger SB Wright October 10, 2018 12:12 PM  

@ Ogre

I see. Thank you for the explanation. I had considered that "some" is a subset of "all", but was unsure if it was regarded as sloppy or even incorrect in logical syllogisms to use less encompassing terms than the premises controlled for.

Blogger GammaCatch October 10, 2018 12:31 PM  

JBP's "Confirmation, then Resignation for Truth" mask slip was Glenn Beck's December/January "Common Ground" monologue. After that there is NO denying that what is being dealt with is an opposition force pretending to be something else.

Well, they weren't the first and they won't be the last. But they are certainly the largest individuals to have public collapses in Fake Right that I can recall in my lifetime.

Also, Q's posts have really been something the last few days. I've been looking most of my life to find people who will actually FIGHT The Left. It's a miraculous thing to witness.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 12:36 PM  

@57- By accept that context I assume you mean under the condition that it's relevant, not a lie, and actually clarifies instead of muddying the water. Peterson's "context" was none of those things.

Okay, by Adams' own rules he must wait 24 hrs. But after 24hrs. he's under no obligation to buy it.

Blogger Daniele Grech Pereira October 10, 2018 12:56 PM  


Blogger Unknown October 10, 2018 12:57 PM  

Scott Adams never lied about being a liberal. So I cut him a lot of slack on that. He’s said one too many things that make him seem like a “Trump base whisperer” for the other side though. The pinnacle of this was trying to counter-signal Tucker Carlson on the value of diversity. Man has been all over the planet, he’s lying and he knows he’s lying about what diversity means for a country

Blogger Daniele Grech Pereira October 10, 2018 12:58 PM  

Owen is starting to shape up.

Blogger The Kurgan October 10, 2018 1:05 PM  

Well... I don’t know you, but based solely on your bloodthirsty mercilessness combined with the patience to watch that crap, I think you might do as a provisional inquisitor.

Blogger Don't Call Me Len October 10, 2018 1:57 PM  

Peterson is apparently represented by the CAA

So he's clearly an actor in it for the shekels. No surprise there.

Isn't formal logic pretty much wasted in the abortion debate? It's a powerfully emotive issue involving the most irrationally emotional people.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 10, 2018 2:18 PM  

@26 Avalanche

A couple months later, he was "suddenly" on fire: 'ALL I can see now in the WSJ is the propaganda:

Share this with him:

WSJ --> SJW --> JWS

Blogger Were-Puppy October 10, 2018 2:23 PM  

@33 The Service

On the other hand, the elves ARE real. Try some
DMT. You'll see what I mean.

It's amazing how many people I have read about having seen machine elves or similar due to DMT.

Blogger RobertT October 10, 2018 2:30 PM  

It appears Taylor Swift will be more help than detriment to the Republican cause.

Blogger Were-Puppy October 10, 2018 2:32 PM  

@45 InformationMerchant

ie the thing I was reading said AJ [did or said something positive pro Q] and Q said AJ was a fraud.

Whatever you are reading is BS. Back then I was listening to AJ every day. He was never pro Q.

He would trot out Zack, referred to as "our very own Q".

Q put out a famous post about Paytriots. That was when Q was calling out people like Corsi.

This is when AJ and Corsi both came out as antiQ. Corsi went so far as to accuse Q of being a communist.

On this topic, AJ is obviously very agitated and I take it as he is afraid someone is cutting into his audience.

Blogger Tars Tarkas October 10, 2018 2:32 PM  

VD wrote:The first indicates another "conservatives R dumb" bias.

Republicans are the dumb party, which is why the lowest IQ group in America votes 90% Democrat.

The reality is that dumb people vote and some of them are Republicans and some are Democrats.

They also play games about the religious right while completely ignoring the Latino and AA vote, two very large groups with very high religiosity. They also conflate crazy religious people with religious people in general.
They also conflate years of leftist indoctrination with intelligence.

Blogger Matamoros October 10, 2018 2:45 PM  

Wasn't Terrance McKenna the guy who claimed that all the AI computers were saying the world was going to end on the Maya Calendar date?

Blogger Frank Lee October 10, 2018 3:08 PM  

Ronald Reagan said he read what the NY Times thought he should do, and did the opposite.

What's interesting is that the mask is not only off the New York Times, but there is a neon sign blinking around the exposed face. Sure, Reagan might have been hip to the idea that you couldn't trust their economic or foreign policy opinions, but I think it's gone way beyond that now. They can't even write simple puff pieces without completely exposing the deep state/globalist battle plans for the next ten years.

As you point out, the Intellectual Dark Web article was so suspicious, it stuck out instantly. But it helpfully provided a clear list of who not to trust, not only Peterson but others that weren't really on my radar.

Still not sure about Scott Adams, but his name being associated with the rest raised a huge red flag. I do believe he played a big part in getting Trump elected. He was the first to warm me to the idea of Trump. But maybe they turned him. Or he wants to return to liberal favor. Or he's being duped.

Blogger Xiety October 10, 2018 3:24 PM  

Daniel Paul Grech Pereira wrote:Owen is starting to shape up.
He's still stuck on Shapiro, and hasn't yet discarded the "good for the Jews/bad for the Jews" filter. But he's searching for the truth in earnest. It's been equal parts fascinating and frustrating to follow him this last year.

Blogger cecilhenry October 10, 2018 3:48 PM  

Peterson does occasionally say some useful things. The problem is that its very selective:

'The faster the Ontario Human Rights Commission is abolished, the better @fordnation.

There isn't a more dangerous organization in Canada, with the possible exception of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education:'

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 3:56 PM  


"Q made some unforced errors. AJ was pro Q until Q went anti AJ. There was no reason to do this, AJ was boosting Q's messages and stands for the same things."


AJ started promoting Jerome Corsi, who is controlled opposition and was deliberately misrepresenting Q's messages. AJ didn't have to know that Corsi is controlled opposition to know that Corsi was misrepresenting both Q's messages and overall message.

Anonymous Anonymous October 10, 2018 4:07 PM  

I think that’s unfair to McKenna. He wasn’t talking about Tolkien elves, and he wasn’t saying that there are elves living in the woods, necessarily, but human beings have been having unexplained experiences involving fairies/elves/aliens/etc all through recorded history, displaying similar characteristics. So there IS something that’s actually happening to people, rather than it just being some metaphor for a made-up experience.

This shouldn’t be controversial. If we believe in God and Jesus Christ, that comes with Heavenly Choirs of Angels, ie. there is a spiritual level of existence. It isn’t far fetched that there exists life on that spiritual level, in some form or another.

This whole concept may, however, be a bridge too far for many, because of the level of strangeness it implies about the world. Witness the furor that erupted when Q even went near that topic. Notice that he didn’t say “aliens are real” but just that the truth is much stranger than people think. Little green men could be real, and they could have been here all along.

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 4:15 PM  


"why I hate Nietzsche,"

Never trust a "philosopher" who never once stepped foot outside of a 5 mile radius of the home he was born in during his entire life.

Blogger SciVo October 10, 2018 4:25 PM  

Say what you will about the IDW, but at least their acronym lends itself well to mockery. I liked Ineffectual Dork Web, but now I see that Impotent Dick Weasels is the best. Is there an I-word for a handjob circle?

Blogger jb October 10, 2018 5:21 PM  

Peterson can't seem to guage the depth of the hole he dug for himself, so he insists on digging deeper.

Blogger R Webfoot October 10, 2018 5:26 PM  

Is there an I-word for a handjob circle?
Vox used "Incestuous," which nicely both captures the cliquishness and refers to whatever the hell Peterson was dreaming about.

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 5:40 PM  


"and I'm going to admit it here right now-Ive never "gotten" Dilbert. I've tried. I really have, but I honestly am bewildered by what's funny about it. I still don't know. "

You've never worked in the IT department of a fortune 500 company/public utility/government.

ANYBODY with IT work experience has either witnessed or been in situations which Dilbert illustrates.

In one meeting at work, my response to a new IT policy was "This sounds like something right out of Dilbert." 2 hours later, we all got a mass voice-mail announcing the cancellation of the policy.

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 5:41 PM  

The specific reason I cited:

"So, GM wants us to keep a $300/day engineer sitting on his hands doing nothing for at least 2 days until at least one old user ID is removed, because of a $0.25/month charge? This sounds like something right out of Dilbert."

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 5:54 PM  


"Wasn't Terrance McKenna the guy who claimed that all the AI computers were saying the world was going to end on the Maya Calendar date?"

I never understood that. Because a calendar has a roll-over, that means "end of the world."

My god, how do we ever make it past Dec. 31st?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 6:09 PM  

Dirk Manly wrote:Never trust a "philosopher" who never once stepped foot outside of a 5 mile radius of the home he was born in during his entire life.
You understand nothing of philosophy. Nor of humans.
How far is it from Stagira to Athens?

Blogger Dirk Manly October 10, 2018 6:26 PM  

I know that a philosophy requires first observing the world. And there isn't much world to see within a 5 mile radius.

A lot of deeply thought, logical philosophical arguments are destroyed by just experiencing the sight of a disqualifying case.

Remember, most of modern Philosophy is about ethics. And ethics is about ought-to's and ought-not-to's. And you can't get an "ought" from an "is."

The less of the world you've experienced, the less you've seen various "oughts" already put into practice.

Totalitarian police state was the realization of Nietzsche ideal society.

I'm sure that wider exposure (like, perhaps, to some society living under a not-benevolent dictator) would have prevented him from writing a great bit of what he wrote, and instead, he would have written stuff that might actually be usable.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 7:20 PM  

Dirk Manly wrote:I know that a philosophy requires first observing the world. And there isn't much world to see within a 5 mile radius.

You can see all of the world merely through an acquaintance with 100 people.

You're a very shallow thinker. Travel gives breadth, not depth.

Neitzche went all in on totalitarianism because he rejected Christ. All moderns who reject Christ wind up there, if they don't stop thinking first..

Blogger Nate73 October 10, 2018 7:40 PM  

Wait wait... the elves aren't real?!

Blogger SciVo October 10, 2018 8:26 PM  

Dirk Manly wrote:My god, how do we ever make it past Dec. 31st?

We don't. It's getting colder because the Fenris wolf is swallowing the sun, and we can only pray that Ragnarok happens before we freeze to death, so that we can die in glorious battle against fire giants instead of as pathetic corpsicles. And then a winged Taylor Swift will welcome us to the afterlife with ironic Hitler quotes.

Blogger Coyotewise October 10, 2018 9:24 PM  

A friend of mine invited me to see Owen Benjamin in Portlandia about a yr ago. I didn't know much about him but he had just recently lost his agent because of SJWs. He knew what Portland was like and deliberately drove out half the audience with hilarious rants about SJWs and soy LGBT and laughed at them as they tsked and groaned and left. For those of us living in the NW it was like watching Clint Eastwood come into one of those towns back in those spaghetti westerns. He spent hours drinking and talking with the handful of us that remained. Saying "I needed this" He is a genuinely good, very honest guy. And I swear, his stream-of-consciousness videos are like a pre-req feeder program for future Ilk, . He's about where VD was during the WND days and moving fast.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 9:41 PM  

@85- Not sure what point you think you're making. It's like 400 miles from Athens, and Aristotle also went to Asia Minor, Lesbos, and Macedon, I believe.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 10:39 PM  

Nate73 wrote:Wait wait... the elves aren't real?!
Well, they ones you see are real.
It's the ones you don't see that aren't real.

tublecane wrote:Not sure what point you think you're making. It's like 400 miles from Athens, and Aristotle also went to Asia Minor, Lesbos, and Macedon, I believe.
Yes, I'm sure you don't get it.

Blogger tublecane October 10, 2018 10:47 PM  

@92- Why don't you just admit you picked a bad example?

Blogger Up from the pond October 10, 2018 10:55 PM  

Next Jordeo-Peterson will call for Trump to resign "for the sake of political peace."

That would merely be another nuanced thought experiment - issued, just like the other one, on the eve of an important U.S. election.

Interesting how the masks drop off in an election year. Taylor Swift, Jordeo-Peterson...

Evil shows its ass when the chips are down.

In any case, now I'm suspicious of the word "nuanced" coming from such people. When I hear that word now, I disable the safety on my revolver.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 11:04 PM  

tublecane wrote:Why don't you just admit you picked a bad example?
Because I didn't. I knew exactly what I was doing. I knew how far it is from Stagira to Athens, and I double checked before I posted.

The fact that you don't understand the point in no way diminishes the point.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 10, 2018 11:10 PM  

How many kilometers is your understanding?
How grams is your wisdom?
Literacy is not measured by the number of languages you've heard without comprehension, nor knowledge by the number of unread books in your library.

Blogger Nate73 October 11, 2018 1:21 AM  

@90: I'm still on the fence about Owen Benjamin, guy comes off as a bit nutty to me, but that's interesting.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 11, 2018 6:58 AM  

@70 Thank you.

I apologize to @31. Thank you for the correction both of you. My logic would apply to AJ.

ie If someone conspiracy guy says the deep state is bad. AJ attacking that guy isn't helping.

Thanks to @76 too.

It sounds like @31 was being kind re Corsi.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd October 11, 2018 8:24 AM  

Up from the pond wrote:
In any case, now I'm suspicious of the word "nuanced" coming from such people. When I hear that word now, I disable the safety on my revolver.

``Nuanced'' usually boils down to ``ignore the little man behind the curtain.''

What revolver has a safety?

Blogger Dirk Manly October 11, 2018 12:26 PM  

What revolver has a safety?

One in which the designer would like to offer the owner the option of having every cylinder loaded.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd October 12, 2018 12:02 AM  

Dirk, that's the transfer bar design, not a safety you can reasonably disable.

Blogger CYGNUS FACETIOUS October 12, 2018 4:39 AM  

Al Du Clur wrote:Ted Lieu because Lieu favors legalizing marijuana
Boombert, when he's candid, will admit to being no different than the single-issue Pro Choice voter-- except smoking blunts stands at the apex of his order of values. Literally the one thing that would have made him go 'persuasion nuclear' on Trump in the campaign. If the entire American Left consisted of Based Dilbert Guys, the world wouldn't be in this grave a situation; but they aren't helping much either. Odd duck outcome for a Boomer, but not the worst possible.

Jack (LJCSOGHMOMAS) wrote:My biggest problem with Adams has always been that his fundamental worldview is nihilism. Humans are "moist robots" that can be programmed. He admires Trump as a manipulator, not as a warrior. Adams has no allegiance to higher values, and doesn't believe in truth, let alone Truth.
Having only several step-children underscores the fundamental Bug/Last Man endgame of his worldview.

Zeroh Tollrants wrote:
NormieCon Israel-loving Christian friend running for pol office-

Dispensationalism & Dual Covenant theology is a helluva drug. Get him some E Michael Jones and Peter Hellend; and some Ariel Toaff's Blood Passover.

Stannous Baratheon wrote:unfair to McKenna. He wasn’t talking about Tolkien elves
He was conversant enough in anthropology to actually be giving a talk at a university to be fair; however, once the entheogen talk strays into contemporary affairs and politics it becomes acid freak Chomskyisms, insufferable.

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Neitzche went all in on totalitarianism because he rejected Christ.
Nietzsche counted among the earliest detractors of the then increasingly fashionable Socialism and Anarchism in his earliest works, and toward the end of his sane life, of a "pale Mandarin" outcome for Prussian overlordship of Germany and Europe as a whole. The systems theory/analogical topology required to parse concrete doctrines out of FN's oeuvre isn't worth the time investment, much less to refute on the basis of a not-all set therefrom (a philosophical Finnegan's Wake: fine as an aesthetic puzzle, otherwise a Macbeth's labyrinthine hermeneutic chore perhaps signifying not anything at all); e.g. "God is Dead, we have killed him." makes Sanhedrin and Judases of us all, -- we are, civilizationally not yet Christian whilst still having lost ground against our forebearers on the path to becoming so (perhaps we are more than a century into The Great Apostasy already, and this is really is the end times-- his atheism/anti-Christianity is overstated. Nietzsche still endorsed a 'dying and rising' Creator god over the solar, conquering Apoll(y)on, after all--

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts