For today: Alt Hype vs Spino debate race realism. Baked got shoah so probably on allsup channel Sunday: 2 literally whos: niggerwewuz vs some woman. Warski live
March 1st Boomer faggot + some random kike vs David Duke + Mark Collet. Warski live 7pm EST March 3rd Styx vs Fuentes about religion March 6th JF vs Jay Dyer about religion April 1st Flat_earther vs JF about flat earth Lowtax vs Anglin (no date) Ryan Dawson vs tba (No date) After every stream ancap user will host a /IBS/ stream
Isaiah Brown
Jeffstiny won again, 1v6 easily and he wasn't even there. fuck bros, nobody can stop him
Jose Gonzalez
>JF watches GEORGE LINCOLN ROCKWELL Glad I caught that live. It was incredible to see the gears turning in his head trying to process what he just witnessed
Levi White
>The alt-right is Andrew Anglin's manifesto >Also no fap >T-t-tonka I'm such a fan >I watch Rocky and shit. I'm a contender >T-t-tonka i-i-if you ever n-n-need someone on you s-s-show m-m-my a-a-ass is ready
How is Joachim such a non lady lover?
Jayden Martinez
>Cannot be refuted, so I'll try to meme it away
Gavin Ortiz
>mfw vee and gyppos are the only thing relevant to Romania
Henry Russell
>>Cannot be refuted, so I'll try to meme it away Is it the liberalists are the same as commies horseshoe? Or the nazis are the same as the communists horseshoe?
Connor Ward
Heh, you make maymays but so does /leftypol/
Jeremiah Lee
i told him to offer tonka a towel for this very outcome
Daniel Cooper
Vee is likeable in a spergy kind of way. It’s too bad he doesn’t realize what it’ll take to save the West
Connor Hill
>Vee is likeable No, he's a fucking snake. Everything he does is gypsy tricks, pilpul, and crocodile tears.
Ryan Gonzalez
You're forgetting your biggest export industry.
Josiah Reyes
a true gyppo then
Cameron Torres
>t. Klaus Saschenheim
Christian Garcia
no I didn't
Jose Baker
And also this legend because I'm feeling charitable and need to hit the bed.
Kayden Russell
ok goblin
Joshua Rivera
Get Jay Dyer on with some liberals. Sargon or something
Ethan Flores
...el atrocidad de los Romanias...
Brody Johnson
...
Cooper Campbell
>Lowtax vs Anglin Haha, really?
Bentley Barnes
...
Isaiah Mitchell
t. Turk friend
Brandon Lewis
>giving up you rights to the state >then I stopped watching >*fake chuckles*
>You said the TEST for delineating between science and non-science theories is falisifiable. Not that scientific theories are. No, read again.
>No, Popper wants to create a society of social justice, where those weak in convictions are protected from harmful fanatics by the mechanisms of broader social consensus. On contrary, those strong in convictions thrives in conversation, when you get fanatic and harmful to other that don't want that harm (unlike a masochist wants to be beat up or whatever), or harmful to themselves to keep them fanatic and not listen to anything as long as that harm persists, what do you do?
>And these variables could not be related to each other without a concept of equality, multiplication, and a product. Theory of algebra? >Moving from our observations about light to a mathematical formula is the role of theory the exact opposite from inductive reasoning (if we deduced the speed of light from Einstein's formula). Yes, math is a tool. It's not the theory.
>What I am claiming is that truly intuitive ideas are conveying direct information, not requiring logical packaging that must be analyzed. The process of analysis is dependent on the faculties of the brain, while the property of identity (a is a) does not. You don't have to base the truth/meaning/value of mathematics on the intuitiveness of if. You just have to poke at it and that if doesn't flinch (so far). I could be wrong but I think property of identity is weirder (uses different math) for the multiverse. Where there is a lot of (You)s that can split and collapse.
Jonathan Jenkins
they all are
Daniel Barnes
I really enjoyed the shitshow on our ancaps autistic stream. Was the best reenactment of those porn movies where 4 guys bang a soyboy.
Luis Peterson
What's up with Thunderf00t lately. I hear he has been going after JF. Any videos on this?
Zachary Brown
>No, read again. Let me quote you, with minor emphasis added: >Falsification is how we [test?] competing theories (fight to the death). Yes, THE TEST is also falsifiable What test of theories are you referring to other than the criterion of falsifiability? You're squirming.
>On contrary, those strong in convictions thrives in conversation, when you get fanatic and harmful to other that don't want that harm (unlike a masochist wants to be beat up or whatever), or harmful to themselves to keep them fanatic and not listen to anything as long as that harm persists, what do you do? I don't do anything. The harm principle is bullshit.
>Theory of algebra? Without basic mathematical operations, you cannot step from the speed of light to mass-energy equivalence. There would be nothing to step into, no actual knowledge, and no reason to create a theory in the first place.
>the exact opposite from inductive reasoning (if we deduced the speed of light from Einstein's formula). Yes, I tried to correct that typo to "deductive reasoning" but the thread 404'd.
>You don't have to base the truth/meaning/value of mathematics on the intuitiveness of if We're discussing where we get our axioms from. I'm claiming we get our axioms from our intuitive faculties, and not some mysterious Platonic realm of forms.
>I could be wrong but I think property of identity is weirder (uses different math) for the multiverse. Where there is a lot of (You)s that can split and collapse. The multiverse hypothesis allows for infinite transgressions of our basic axioms, considering that the mathematics that are consistent with our Universe may not apply in some other Universe.
James King
>I'm claiming we get our axioms from our intuitive faculties intuition JntjʊˈJʃ(ə)n/Submit noun the ability to understand something instinctively, without the need for conscious reasoning.
ZFC is NOT intuitive, it is something that was REASONED very heavily.
>the mathematics that are consistent with our Universe Idiot. There is not mathematics which is "consistent" with out Universe.
If you have a right triangle with 1 long sides at both sides of each angle, how long is the second line? Based PURELY on mathematics we model this triangle as part of the |R^n Hilbert space.
Ian Rodriguez
This shit is so gay, I can't even. Why don't you faggots get into IRL BS? Like corner fucking THOTS in NYC and ask them questions and respond "1 v. 1 me in my bedroom, THOT." I've gotten so much pussy from doing that.
Benjamin Smith
>ZFC is NOT intuitive, it is something that was REASONED very heavily. Bitch I already told you that the ZFC has nothing. to do. with intuitionism. Intuitionism arose out of a REACTION AGAINST ZFC.
>Cantor's set theory led to the axiomatic system of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZFC), now the most common foundation of modern mathematics. Intuitionism was created, in part, as a reaction to Cantor's set theory. >Modern constructive set theory includes the axiom of infinity from ZFC (or a revised version of this axiom) and the set N of natural numbers. Most modern constructive mathematicians accept the reality of countably infinite sets (however, see Alexander Esenin-Volpin for a counter-example). >Brouwer rejected the concept of actual infinity, but admitted the idea of potential infinity. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionism >There is not mathematics which is "consistent" with out Universe. Meaning it would be impossible to formulate basic axioms in these alternate universes. The fact that we can construct mathematical systems in our Universe is proof that our Universe is consistent enough for us to undertake mathematical operations. I do not believe in correspondence theory. Are all Krauts this fucking dense? You need to have everything spelled out for you, else you go on some meaningless autistic tangent like fucking clockwork.
Nathan Richardson
>Bitch I already told you that the ZFC has nothing. to do. with intuitionism. Intuitionism arose out of a REACTION AGAINST ZFC. EXACTLY and ZFC is the most common basis for mathematics. You are talking about the foundations of mathematics and *whatever you say about intuitionism* isn't all that relevant, most of modern mathematics *is* grounded in ZFC.
>>Brouwer rejected the concept of actual infinity, but admitted the idea of potential infinity. You realize this alone puts him apart from 99% of other mathematicians, right?
>>There is not mathematics which is "consistent" with out Universe. Prove me otherwise.
>The fact that we can construct mathematical systems in our Universe is proof that our Universe is consistent enough for us to undertake mathematical operations. For what fucking reason are these operations consistent?
You also didn't answer my question, because you *obviously can't* from a mathematical perspective it is entirely ambiguous, although a physicist would answer you sqrt(2) without much hesitation. But there is no reason to presume that ||.||_2 has any more relation to reality then ||.||_1.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999, the mathematical claim is independent from the actual triangle. The axioms don't correspond to the universe at all, as they do not link reality and mathematics in any way.
Mason Hernandez
>[test?] Choose. I.e drop one and not the other. >THE TEST is also falsifiable The test in those testable theory. That test. Experiment would be a better word.
>I don't do anything. The harm principle is bullshit. Harm I meant unwanted violence. Could be bullshit depends on the degree of violence. Honor killing is easy case, spanking is harder case. You shouldn't be forced to do anything also.
>Without basic mathematical operations, you cannot step from the speed of light to mass-energy equivalence. There would be nothing to step into, no actual knowledge, and no reason to create a theory in the first place. Yes. You can't create theory of mass-energy equivalence with just algebra too that's all I'm saying.
>Yes, I tried to correct that typo to "deductive reasoning" but the thread 404'd. Still not inductive, tho.
>We're discussing where we get our axioms from. I'm claiming we get our axioms from our intuitive faculties, and not some mysterious Platonic realm of forms. I don't know about that, then. Isn't algebra fairly new in humans at least? Or human and other keen animal uses it without knowing explicitly is maybe what you're saying.
>The multiverse hypothesis allows for infinite transgressions of our basic axioms, considering that the mathematics that are consistent with our Universe may not apply in some other Universe. Yes, could be. If you're interested in multiverse you could look up Deutsch (multiverse) or Max Tegmark (mathverse).
>Intuitionism >To an intuitionist, the claim that an object with certain properties exists is a claim that an object with those properties can be constructed. Any mathematical object is considered to be a product of a construction of a mind, and therefore, the existence of an object is equivalent to the possibility of its construction. Huh, Deutsch is working on something similar: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructor_theory
Landon Diaz
>You are talking about the foundations of mathematics and *whatever you say about intuitionism* isn't all that relevant, most of modern mathematics *is* grounded in ZFC. Just because intuitionism is independent of the ZFC framework does not mean it doesn't apply to axioms subsumed into ZFC.
>You realize this alone puts him apart from 99% of other mathematicians, right? Meaningless.
>Prove me otherwise. Okay: the mathematical statement "1 + 1 = 2" remains consistent in our Universe. It is not true in one spatio-temporal position and not true in another.
>For what fucking reason are these operations consistent? Because numbers do not fall apart as a result of natural processes.
>The axioms don't correspond to the universe at all, as they do not link reality and mathematics in any way. Again, I do not believe in correspondence theory and never made such a claim. You are having trouble understanding what I'm saying.
Leo Moore
>the mathematical statement "1 + 1 = 2" remains consistent in our Universe. That is nothing more then a statement of faith, it isn't a "proof" by any definition of that word, in fact it is a statement *beyond* proof.
>Because numbers do not fall apart as a result of natural processes. Another statement of faith. Might as well argue that "God made mathematics consistent".
>Again, I do not believe in correspondence theory and never made such a claim. One would assume that someone who claims that "the mathematical statement "1 + 1 = 2" remains consistent in our Universe" actually means that ""1+1=2" is not independent of our universe".
Kevin Young
>The test in those testable theory. That test. Experiment would be a better word. An experiment falsifies, it is not falsified.
>Harm I meant unwanted violence. Could be bullshit depends on the degree of violence. Honor killing is easy case, spanking is harder case. You shouldn't be forced to do anything also. Honestly I don't give a flying fuck so I'm letting this point go entirely.
>Yes. You can't create theory of mass-energy equivalence with just algebra too that's all I'm saying. DEDUCTION: principles -> action/motion. INDUCTION: action/motion -> principles. I never said math alone is sufficient. I am stating that without math, without concepts, there would be nothing to "drag" phenomena towards through the scientific process, which is meant to solve the problem of induction.
>Still not inductive, tho. ...That's what I said.
>I don't know about that, then. Isn't algebra fairly new in humans at least? Or human and other keen animal uses it without knowing explicitly is maybe what you're saying. Algebra, as an area of study, dates to Hellenistic Alexandria. Arithmetic and geometry are ancient, however. Crows can count, and our ape-like ancestors had a rudimentary understanding of geometry to produce more deadly stone handaxes. The basic forms of math are arithmetic and geometry, which deal with duration in time and extendedness in space, respectively. Algebra is a higher set of operations than these basic forms, but a basically more complex way of counting.
1) Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Scott Israel want to have a school shooting in their county. 2) Alphabet Soup gets a tip on a "suspicious comment" that N. Cruz made about wanting to be a "professional school shooter". 3) Alphabet Soup says they can't verify it and leave him in place to become the patsy. 4) Date & time of shooting is selected by DWS and Scott Israel. 5) Feb 14th – Students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School have an evacuation drill in the morning. 6) Something causes Cruz to show up on campus via an Uber Taxi("Hey meet me outside class after Pre-Calc! --Cindy"). 7) Team of 2-3 shooters (Mossad Agents) go into the school and kills kids with Cruz on campus. 8) Alexa Miednik(Blonde Jew witness) sees Cruz during the evacuation and speaks to him while hearing shots fired elsewhere on campus. 9) For unknown reasons, hired shooters fail to execute Cruz and stage his suicide. 10) Students are evacuated and Cruz leaves campus in the shuffle. 11) Cruz does not know the police are after him and decides to go get something to eat at McDonald's/Subway without knowing he is the pre-selected patsy. 12) FBI/Police arrest him as he walks down a residential street on his way home as he has been pre-selected to be the "shooter". 13) They spend the night using MKUltra/Brainwashing techniques him convincing him that he has done the crime. 14) Feb 15th – Cruz pleads guilty to 17 counts of premeditated homicide due to the MKUltra/Brainwashing techniques. 15) Feb 16th - Demolition of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fl is announced to cover up the scene of the crime.
More points: >Scott Israel quoted the Talmud in press conference for shooting >MSM made sure to report the shooting interrupted "Holocaust classes" >Several victims were Jewish (blood passover/sacrifice ritual) >Cruz was an Elsagate MKUltra victim / Youtube pedo
Evan Stewart
I think you're in the wrong thread mate there is no shooting being talked about here
William Carter
I must ask, who are you two, and what do you do? Why engage in this level of debate in a shitposting thread on a shitposting board? That said, please continue.
William Nelson
>That is nothing more then a statement of faith, it isn't a "proof" by any definition of that word, in fact it is a statement *beyond* proof. All mathematics is based on faith that it is not just a giant lie.
>Might as well argue that "God made mathematics consistent". Funny, that is Jay's argument.
>One would assume that someone who claims that "the mathematical statement "1 + 1 2" remains consistent in our Universe" actually means that ""1+1=2" is not independent of our universe". ...No, because the numbers one or two do not correspond to any physical object in our Universe. The present condition of our Universe does not interfere in the conveyance of information.
Elijah Sullivan
This level of debate used to be far more common before Sup Forums was wiped during Gamergate.
Samuel Brown
Is the Joe Rogan and Douglas Murray vid worth watching?
Austin Lopez
It's just thunderfoot sperging on twitter and making horrible videos where he shits on JF for dating an autist. It's fucking pathetic.
Asher White
Yo, Andy. Get Todd Lewis on the TJ Kirk vs Jay Dyer debate Fucking stoked for that BTW Hopefully there will be more TJ Kirk in the future as well, I know Styx dislikes him. Styx vs TJ That would be a match of the ages
Tyler Cooper
What's Vee's deviantart account?
Can't stand the cunt. I'm glad it's finally caught on that he's Sargoy's lapdog, you could see him clinging to Sargon a mile off back in the day.
John Taylor
isn't like 1+1 = 2 an convention but also abstraction of the fact that one thing and one thing make two things isn't the division of universe into object and things also a model purely on the mental level?
Easton Clark
I don't think it helped that Kushner bought shills to keep Sup Forums on the Trump-train either.
Owen Rodriguez
>I must ask, who are you two, and what do you do? Why engage in this level of debate in a shitposting thread on a shitposting board? I am procrastinating on studying for my next University exam.
>All mathematics is based on faith that it is not just a giant lie. >Funny, that is Jay's argument. And that is, at least in my opinion, a very respectable position to hold, as it openly admits the limits of mathematics.
>...No, because the numbers one or two do not correspond to any physical object in our Universe. I would agree to that, interestingly I had a discussion on /sci/ about "alien mathematics" and everyone there was convinced that the opposite was true.
Christian Murphy
i really wish /cow/ would fuck off looking into Vee, he is the alt-right generation's Venomfang X, basic bitch entry level grind stuff for young libertarians/right winger youtubers
Lincoln Johnson
r u guys talking about a specific stream?
Ayden Lewis
Was a good one. Stopped watching rigan regularly a few years ago. But this one was worth it. Douglas got out some very interesting points.
Ryder Miller
imagine when your politics is basically limited to YouTube celebrities and chan boards.
Joseph Long
Thats important to know, though, that Zionism and Judaism are in fact two different things.
Jacob Thompson
Not really.
Leo Martin
>And that is, at least in my opinion, a very respectable position to hold, as it openly admits the limits of mathematics. Limits that I fully acknowledge.
>I would agree to that, interestingly I had a discussion on /sci/ about "alien mathematics" and everyone there was convinced that the opposite was true. That's because we are conditioned to think in terms of naive realism as children (generally speaking). Just to be clear, what I mean that "mathematical statements remain consistent in our Universe" is that the underlying structure of reality does not disrupt the presentation of information in logical-mathematical form. For example: if time reversed direction every 0.5 picoseconds, stuck in a permanent symmetrical loop forever, it would be impossible to construct mathematical systems as we know it.
Cooper Butler
of course
Wyatt Clark
Hello plato.
Carson Brown
so who is this Jay and where can I listen to his/her arguments
i'm a newfag to /irritableBowelSyndrome/ only heard about it thru styxhexenhammer he thinks it's silly tell me why it's not for egotistical fags
Jace Diaz
I hear that name a lot but I didn't know Plato was this redpilled
Benjamin Fisher
>tell me why it's not for egotistical fags because such people have hard time dealing with having their egos broken
Hunter Williams
I actually disagree with you guys on sargon; Primarily in your comparing him to kraut.
The reality is that you need people like sargon, or peterson. Sargons fucking stupid name of independent individualists aside he does make a good point that it would be useful for centrists to construct some degree of world view which is not apathy or going along with whatever appears to be the media sway of the moment.
My main issue for sargon is that he seems to drink way too much( and it affects his work) and that he lacks the balls to actually delve into anything controversial; perhaps even detail his personal views on things beyond feminists or whatever of the most low hanging fruit he can target that given week.
I actually liked his insight into the syrian air strikes and recognition that the media and UN was playing games out of its own personal distaste towards assad.
He also needs to fucking learn how to control himself in debates ( again my guess is part of it is drinking)
Elijah Rivera
>The reality is that you need people like sargon, or peterson. That is not reality.
Connor Morris
what's your point, the overton window already changed with the help of Sup Forums and youtube.
Andrew Gonzalez
>Just to be clear, what I mean that "mathematical statements remain consistent in our Universe" is that the underlying structure of reality does not disrupt the presentation of information in logical-mathematical form. For example: if time reversed direction every 0.5 picoseconds, stuck in a permanent symmetrical loop forever, it would be impossible to construct mathematical systems as we know it. I can't actually disagree with that.
Jonathan Bennett
Which is why I was sounded frustrated in my reply earlier.
Cameron Morris
>An experiment falsifies, it is not falsified. Experiment can always be wrong, hence falsifiable. The tester can always be tested and so on.
>Honestly I don't give a flying fuck so I'm letting this point go entirely. Yeah, it doesn't look important unless you get detailed. It could improve education infinitely if you're talking about consent.
>DEDUCTION: principles -> action/motion. >INDUCTION: action/motion -> principles. >I never said math alone is sufficient. I am stating that without math, without concepts, there would be nothing to "drag" phenomena towards through the scientific process, which is meant to solve the problem of induction. >without concepts That's what I meant by theory-laden. Because no observation is self-evident. You could say first principles->action/motion->principles, what it really is is "I'm starting with these to guess something about something out there in reality, I could be wrong but lets see how it goes". Also it's either true (for now) of false, there's no likely true/false. For physical reality that is.
>Crows can count Reminds me of a eagle baiting a swan from inside a cage webm.
>if time reversed direction every 0.5 picoseconds, stuck in a permanent symmetrical loop forever, it would be impossible to construct mathematical systems as we know it. Well arithmetic still exist there.
Justin Edwards
Understandable. So is it simply political argument or is there some structural backbone to it? To me it seems like it's just discourse. Why "blood sports" ?
Leo Ross
overton window changed to what? nazbol and "based israel" ??? altright is certainly trying.
Jason Anderson
I feel like they’re trying too hard by calling it that.
Josiah Walker
Estonians dont need brainwashing they are happy to be like that. Most of estonian girls love niggers and there is an actual dating site in estonia for girls to meet niggers. >t.estonian
Hudson Collins
>Experiment can always be wrong, hence falsifiable. The tester can always be tested and so on. Well no. The results of an experiment can be falsified by its methodology. The data gathered during an experiment can falsify a hypothesis. All an experiment is is a rigorous quantification of isolated phenomena, it makes no claim beyond the data and hence it makes no sense to claim it is false.
>That's what I meant by theory-laden. Because no observation is self-evident. You could say first principles->action/motion->principles, what it really is is "I'm starting with these to guess something about something out there in reality, I could be wrong but lets see how it goes". Also it's either true (for now) of false, there's no likely true/false. For physical reality that is. Exactly, all worldviews are inherently circular.
>Well arithmetic still exist there. Not really, you just have an oscillation between two discrete states. It's impossible to extract information in such a Universe, hence no mathematics (unless you conceive of some lifeform where 0.5 picoseconds is experienced as billions of years, but this not possible in a Universe where every law other than time remains the same as ours). Hairy stuff.
Jace King
>Hurr Durr the people attacking jews are pawns of jews who want jews to be attacked!
Jesus fucking christ you guys are autistic.
Julian Scott
>youtube.com/watch?v=UohR3OXzXA8 I think computer is inaccurate description more accurate would be dream but there is no brain that dreams it, brains are just dream objects no the hallucination occurs in pure nothingness along with every other possible hallucination it's called blood sports because every tactic is allowed and because it's entertaining
Cooper Fisher
It's just one guy, his name's moarpheus, he's an autistic kike who's been shilling the board for years producing propaganda to attack any and all right wing public figures. He particularly hates Richard Spencer with a deep burning passion, he is responsible for all the Spencer = CIA shilling that has been going on here for years now.
Learn to recognize him, most of his propaganda has the same style and he's often shilling like a kike on crack to the point where you'll eventually notice it's the same guy going on >76 posts by this ID shillstorms in multiple threads.
Ryder Myers
>Hurr Durr the people attacking jews are also supporting Israel but this doesn't mean Zionism is a Jewish trick!
Carter Cox
Good to know, thanks mate!
Joshua Roberts
This
The guy is in every thread
Bentley Jackson
>everyone who doesnt fall for our jewish tricks is the same person..at all hours of the day.. in every single thread wew
Noah Stewart
They support the principle of an ethnic state Israel is built on. Practically nobody likes Israel or supports what they do or how they're involved in western politics.
Nathaniel Harris
Now he'll go on about how israel needs to be destroyed and how every jew on the planet must be exterminated. Just watch.
Adrian Richardson
>They support the principle of an ethnic state Israel is built on Israel is a failed ethno-State and Dr. Duke agrees with me. Furthermore, Jews use Israel to attack all other people, even engaging in European Genocide. But you somehow think the Jews deserve their own wealthy and armed ethno-State?! Can you cuck harder?
Josiah Johnson
kill yourself
Adam Gray
Called it. You are one pathetic kike moarpheus lmao.
Tyler Collins
called what? how about you address the argument or dont even reply? adults are talking.
Jose Scott
This is now a desTINY thread.
Post your tiniest midgets.
Asher Edwards
>Estonians dont need brainwashing they are happy to be like that.
Wouldn't that be an indication that they too are brainwashed, not only the Bongs?
Sebastian Brown
I predicted you calling for the destruction of israel because I know who you are faggot and you probably recognize me by now too. I expose you every single time.
Choke on a foreskin you disgusting kike.
Colton Cooper
>I predicted you calling for the destruction of israel Where the hell did I call for the destruction of Israel you 48 IQ mong?
Jayden Moore
>Well no. The results of an experiment can be falsified by its methodology. The data gathered during an experiment can falsify a hypothesis. All an experiment is is a rigorous quantification of isolated phenomena, it makes no claim beyond the data and hence it makes no sense to claim it is false. Not just methodology. The instrument can be faulty, so does the theory of what you observe. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(hypothetical_planet)#Search
>Exactly, all worldviews are inherently circular. What's with the fixation on circular. It' more like a castle built on sand.
>Not really, you just have an oscillation between two discrete states. It's impossible to extract information in such a Universe, hence no mathematics (unless you conceive of some lifeform where 0.5 picoseconds is experienced as billions of years, but this not possible in a Universe where every law other than time remains the same as ours). Hairy stuff. But you don't need to exist there to know what mathematical properties it could have physically, or rather what it can't have. Only what kind of law of physics permits that. I think Multi-verse Theory can.
That's a lot of claim, Morpheus on kush.
Robert Thompson
>you somehow think the Jews deserve their own wealthy and armed ethno-State? If they don't deserve one and they don't deserve to live anywhere else in the world, tell me Morpheus, what should we do?
Caleb Adams
Your mistake is thinking we have two choices:
>destroy Israel and the Jews >let the Jews do whatever they want to the world from the safety of Israel
Why can't be meet in the middle and say
>All Jews should be sent to Israel >But they should not have the capability of attacking or subverting any other Nation
???
That's all my position is on Israel. How do you find yourself opposing it then? Is it because I'm not part of your super cool Aut-Kike eceleb YouTube club? Holy fucking shit...
Hunter Green
What if Spino ambushes AltHype with a study AltHype has never heard of and can't read live during a debate, so AltHype looks wrong even if the study has errors or doesn't imply what Spino claims it implies?
Kayden Jones
I've heard this as well as the.. What was the deal with Fuentes? gay/mexican/jew?
