Krautgate general

Krautgate general
blood sport sedition
look for embeds in post 2, 3 and 4

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/siegeculture_/status/955970123948593152
youtube.com/watch?v=kuDtH0txGvs
youtube.com/watch?v=LY2siKclhh0
youtube.com/watch?v=TEGRVW9iIt4
youtu.be/9vBckObhKMQ?t=1h55m36s
youtube.com/watch?v=hJEoUxF8APs
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

and no, those are not murdoch chan feet

Couldn’t you keep the same format faggit?

Responding to last thread It’s go something along the lines of naming a animal trait that if found in humans, it would justify killing and consuming them. If you can’t name a specific trait that would justify killing a human then your an immoral faggot. And no it’s not sentience since supposedly it has been scientifically proven that some animals possess sentience. I’m not a vegan either but after watching all the debates with Vegan Gains and AskYourself I just accepted that I eat meat and treat some animals different than others because I am inconsistent. But I like meat, so I choose to be inconsistent even if by the eyes of vegans I am technically a murderer.

twitter.com/siegeculture_/status/955970123948593152

sweden guy fucking died so, no, if you have the templats you can use posts 2,3 and 4 (and maybe 5) to reposts the same 2 months old memes about some black guy etc

some black guy died for this meme

Guess who also was in Kraut's server?

youtube.com/watch?v=kuDtH0txGvs

oh wait, is that guy who's bringing kraut back? spicy

youtube.com/watch?v=LY2siKclhh0

This faggot too. They're coming back. It's not over.

ehhh, is that really worth a watch or cringe?

Is there or is there not evidence that Kraut doxxed someone? Now I’m confused. I know people in his server where doxxing people but what is the grade of deniability he has?

OK who's nasty little toes are these?

he is on record saying he had crp dox (then again crp being drama-fucker himself made video with his post code), so it is either counter op or double counter op and his comeback was planned from the beginning (that would make metokur part of that whole plan though and the whole eceleb drama would go into shit)

>Tattoos
Dropped

not mc from what I heard, but posted by murdoch murdoch himself in his last ama thread right at exit and no answers given

Didn’t Destiny mentioned in yesterday’s stream that he talked with Kraut too? If they join forces it’s over for you Race realist cucks.

think sargon being behind it is mindfuck, think metokur and sargon are behind it together, welcome to krautgate 2.0

Destiny is getting buttblasted in jail, mate.

comment section only. the guy is a jew.

>race doesn't real, but jews are an ethnic group, goy

>whites don't exist and don't deserve a homeland
>lol jews do exist and israel deserves to exist as a jewish state
He also tries arguing that israel isn't an ethnostate simply because it isn't literally 100% jewish.

Also, the whole "you don't exist" argument is a distinctly jewish tactic. They're doing it to white people right now, but you know when else they employ this tactic?
Palestinians.

If you ever argue to a kike about israel/palestine, they'll go off on this shit about how "palestinians" fundamentally don't exist as a people
>Palestinian? what is that? do you mean jordanian? Syrian? I do not know such thing as a palestinian!
...and now they're doing the same shit to us. First they try to invalidate our existence, and then they try to wipe us out.

For what? For calling JF a rapist?

why is there no video on sargon deleting his video? or is my youtube-fu lacking?

youtube.com/watch?v=TEGRVW9iIt4

For deserting his post at Santa's workshop.

damn expected that grouping of black guys chimping out but what is black after all

its was funny when sargon said sam harris doesnt understand the internet and internet culture while he is the guy butchering memes and now dont even know how youtube works.

Gay af joke m8. You could say it fell short on humor.

That Filipino looking woman looks pretty nervous desu.

>Reddit memes and selective editing.

DROPPED. I can smell the strawmen and lying by omissions before I have even watched 5 minutes of this crap.

>giving attention to e-celebs
Cucks

...

It's just loki's wager for the millionth time.

No you’re just too retarded to actually argue and proceed to use your color wavelength meme.

He’s not denying differences across clusters or between humans, he’s denying the scientific existence of “race” since those differences are not enough to prove it

So what you're saying is he's making a loki's wager.

For that he would have to deny that there are very specific differences that separate one group to another.

more trap feet pls ^_^

>Also, the whole "you don't exist" argument is a distinctly jewish tactic.
I witnessed this the other day when i was listening to the Radical Agenda, when Cantwell had Andrew Anglin on. There was some kike-caller who actually tried to argue that whites don't exist and white americans aren't a thing, at the same time he was trying to make a point on how Jews are a thing. Why do these Kikes always resort to the same fucking tactics? Hitler was 100% right on how Jews debate.

How whites debate?

Let me guess, was he arguing that english and german and irish are things, but whiteness overall is not?
This is like saying that because you're more closely related to your brother than your cousin, that the entire concept of an over-arching family doesn't exist. As if a Swede and a German have no more in common than a Swede does with a Somali.

>fuzzy boards means genetic clusters don't real
loki's wager 100%

What is white???

Whose feet are they?

Where in the video he said genetic clusters weren’t real?

What is white, whitey?

it's a semantic argument. pilpul. taxonomy is a method of classification, an empirical tool, not a method.

When tf is sargon v spencer round 2?? he said a week like 2 weeks ago

I hope it happens but Spencer laughs every time Sargon tries to make an "argument"

How are races classified taxonomically? And I have seen all your meme graphs so think twice before posting pseudoscience.

sho bobs bitch

If you can consistently with at least 75 % accuracy divide entities into two groups just by eyeballing them, those groups are real. That's pretty much all there is to it.

Now this is something to be excited for. Was it the AW guys who found/contacted him? Anyways props to whoever did and also on the website.

Changed your pirate flag for another pirate flag?

fuk u bitch
open vegana

You’re telling me you could classify all the people of earth in two groups just by eyeballing them?

Easily. I could classify them into multiple groups just by eyeballing them. At least to ten different ones, I'd expect.

Changed a nigger flag for another nigger flag?

>all the people of earth

put my ass in ur asshole

>multiple groups just by eyeballing them
This is more realistic. Now, do you think another person could classify them in a different manner than you?

>Now, do you think another person could classify them in a different manner than you?
Someone with more attuned eyes could certainly divide them into further sub groups. But if we chose a fixed number, let's say 10, we would divide everyone just about the same. It has actually been done.

men and women

children and adult

human and shitskin

so easy I even reddit posted

Ok but would that other person put the same people you put on those 10 groups? If so with what degree of accuracy? Would you say with a 75% of accuracy? Multiply it for different people, would they all put with at least 75% of accuracy those same people in those 10 groups?

>men and woman
What are traps?

>child or adult
What are teenagers?

>human or shit skins
What are mutts?

>painted toes
>feet tattoo
What ever it is, it will hang.

>What are traps?
gay
>What are teenagers?
not adults, unless they're adults
>What are mutts?
shitskins

States put people in groups all the time.

>gay

You just invented other category Aussie faggot. You said you only use 2.

Not an argument

>Ok but would that other person put the same people you put on those 10 groups?
With at least 75 %, yes.
>would they all put with at least 75% of accuracy those same people in those 10 groups?
Yes.

Let's take some groups that I'm sure people would naturally divide:
Western Europeans
Slavs
South Europeans
Arabs
Sub-Saharan Africans
Indians
East Asians
Amerindians
Australian Aboroginals

That's 9 groups. I am certain everyone could divide people into 9 groups, and the contents of each group of each person asked would be similar with at least 75 % accuracy.

>What are teenagers?
That is exactly why the rule is 75 %. A Bengal tiger might have a child with a Sumatran tiger, so one expert would say the cub is a Bengal tiger, and another would say it's a Sumatran tiger. It would go into the error margin. Edge cases do not invalidate the groups. If they did, just about all knowledge would be worthless, since it's really hard to be 100 % certain about anything. You might say that if you drop a brick, it will always fall towards the ground, but that's not true. Someone might catch it, or a hurricane might take it away. That still doesn't invalidate the theory of gravity.

really trying to split hairs there eh chaim ? the term gay is used to refer to a male

>only use 2
I never said that
No, it's a factual statement. States put people into arbitrary groups. You see, there is this thing called demographics. States like to cater to them because these groups have a vested interest in outcomes for their group.

So going to the main argument you’re telling me those 9 groups for example, which each one of them having distinct characteristic with one another, could those be called races?

States don’t put them in demographics. There is nothing stopping a negro from identifying himself as white. Neither an hispanic with clear skin.

>could those be called races?
Yes, they could. Although, we'd probably prefer to do clustering with genetic distance instead. That way we'd get more 'scientific' results. However, it is known that the clustering based on genetics divides people into the same groups as people would themselves when asked.

youtu.be/9vBckObhKMQ?t=1h55m36s

If you are born in a country and given a birth certificate, you're put into any number of categories states keep track of. Number of infants in a region. They use this data for funding services to that area. Sex of the child is something they keep track of. Relations, infectious disease or congenital disease, race, citizenship status and so on.

You're given no choice to become a citizen, but you will be made a member of that group.

>There is nothing stopping a negro from identifying himself as white.
There is nothing stopping the mentally ill from identifying as Napolean, a space alien or a woman. These people fall into the 'crazy' categorization.

>However, it is known that the clustering based on genetics divides people into the same groups as people would themselves when asked.

Ok but the question is those groups. You agree those could be called races. If a make more subdivisions based on more specific genetic differences I could come up with a lot more groups. Therefore wouldn’t you agree the “concept” of race is assigned arbitrarily on how we decide to divide humans based on differences, either observable or genetic?

>There is nothing stopping the mentally ill from identifying as Napolean, a space alien or a woman. These people fall into the 'crazy' categorization.

Neither Napoleon or Space Alien is a demographic group. Also there is not “crazy” categorization I don’t know what you’re talking about.

I have two questions.
Is Donald Trump white?
Is shaquille o’neil black?

>I could come up with a lot more groups.
You could, but at some point you would not reach the 75 % accuracy anymore. How to basically assign people into minimal groups is as follows:
1. Take pictures of as many different people as you can.
2. Show the pictures to everyone, and ask them to divide them in two groups: Those who are in your group, and those who are not.
This way you will get a bunch of quite well defined groups.

>Therefore wouldn’t you agree the “concept” of race is assigned arbitrarily
No, it's not that arbitrary at all. Take this image, for instance. I'm sure you could quite confidently divide it into three groups, even when there is quite significant overlapping. Is it arbitrary, when everyone would divide this into three groups? I don't think it is.

Ive been really enjoying the morning Kumite. Anyone else?

>Neither Napoleon or Space Alien is a demographic group.
It depends on the number of Napolean's. There has been enough that the term "Napolean Complex" is a thing. Also if aliens exist, likely given that it is a big universe, they're entitled to categorization.
>Also there is not “crazy” categorization I don’t know what you’re talking about.
The mentally ill don't exist. All those mental health organizations are pandering to fiction. You heard it here. Peak liberalistism.

You don’t understand my question, I’m not saying race is arbitrary I’m saying the concept of defining what groups fall within what’s defined as race it’s arbitrary . You for example gave me 9 groups and admitted that they could be called race right? what if based on different phenotypes such as the color of hair and eyes I want to create a different group, and call my group x race. Wouldn’t that be possible?

Is Bravin Ruin white?

Braving Ruin is a youtube channel.

>Didn’t Destiny mentioned in yesterday’s stream
Nobody knows, since nobody but you watch that lil nigger. Shoo shoo.

Napoleon Complex is a condition, not a demographic group, also demographic surveys that you were referring on don’t include psychiatric diseases numbnuts.

They just cant help themselves

Literally everything has to be about women.
>Unnecessary to show those ugly toes, but hey maybe some beta orbiter will tell me that they look good

>what if based on different phenotypes such as the color of hair and eyes I want to create a different group, and call my group x race. Wouldn’t that be possible?
You can make categories of anything you want. You can divide people into groups based on one feature or another. However, when you divide animals into groups, you take into account all features.

You might separate blue eyed and brown eyed people into two groups. But then if you add hair color to the mix, you will now have four groups. If you add skin color, you would undoubtedly have eight groups, and many of those groups might look very similar to others. Once you've added 10 more features, and you have thousands of groups, the groups would probably look very arbitrary. But if you start from the point that you take into account all features, you would end up with a handful of well defined groups with very slight overlapping.

>Napoleon Complex is a condition
So a label given to people that share characteristics. It follows that if you can categorize these characteristics, you can categorize people with these characteristics. Making that categorization a group.
>also demographic surveys that you were referring on [] don’t include psychiatric diseases numbnuts.
But there are mental health surveys. Funded by governments. Thus government surveys mental health.

peak liberalistism

>You can make categories of anything you want.

Hence it’s arbitrary. Although it wouldn’t be practical to have a lot of groups but still.

Government don’t pick up data of mental or physical diseases through surveys, they gather that through ICD codes. I swear whatever the ethnostate I just hope they exclude anyone with Australian phenotypes.

What? I just became aware because other nigger mentioned on another /IBS/ thread. Nys fgt.

>Hence it’s arbitrary. Although it wouldn’t be practical to have a lot of groups but still.
But it's not arbitrary. You create an N-dimensional hypercube based on as many features as you bother to measure, and then you apply some clustering algorithm. You divide your data set into training and validation sets, and you create your model based on the training set. If your validation set seems to give the expected results, you're set. It is not arbitrary.

>Government don’t pick up data of mental or physical diseases through surveys, they gather that through ICD codes.
They gather statistics, then survey those statistics before making a judgment and taking action. Peak liberalistism.

>then survey those statistics before making a judgment

They don’t survey shit. Maybe in your godforsaken meme country. There is no need to survey if a doctor already diagnosed you with a disease.

>as you bother to measure

You do understand what arbitrary means right?

Do you even know what survey means? I'm using the 'look closely at and examine' definition. Did you think I meant they had someone with a clipboard, going door to door?

peak liberalistism

do you? the fact he's measuring at all means his evaluation is based on a system and not whim.

peak liberalistism

Do you know what diminishing returns means? You don't need to measure that many features. You will reach the same conclusion with quite few.

In fat, if you measure all possible features and sort all features based on their effect on the variance across the whole set, you'd likely notice that two or three features are already enough to explain 99 % of the variance. In humans, this is very clear. You can explain over 90 % of the variance with skin color alone. But you could, of course, measure hormone levels, skull sizes, number of toes, IQ, muscle density and coverage of hair, if you wish, but those would be quite useless in the overall classification.

Could have also been a telephonic survey or a questionnaire. Ok monkey boy, you have a point.

youtube.com/watch?v=hJEoUxF8APs

get comfy

Sargon is debating....some fucking nobody. Why is he afraid of Spencer? He promised to debate him again. Why is he running?

I do not belong to the monkey boy group. Why are you seeking to classify me as such? Monkeys can't even use Sup Forums. What a silly thing to say.

>But you could, of course, measure hormone levels, skull sizes, number of toes, IQ,

Ok just to be curious, how many races do you understand exist? Meaning in how many groups should we divide humans to obtain meaningful differences to stabling, country limits maybe?