applejack @applejack@gameliberty.club
Joined Apr 2021
@wowaname @cum @happymonkey wtf is that account
@Mek101 @tigertaurus @matana @autu886234 @mushroom_soup @TheAncestor @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @Kagekokoro@neckbeard.xyz @Mikuchi @Ricotta Chances of getting salmonella from eggs is basically 0. I've been eating 4 raw eggs a day for months
@MisterRogersSnapped @TheAncestor He's on here. I just miss when he had that French wig on
@josh 30 can be a comfy community. You actually get to know people
@autu886234 @matana @TheAncestor @mushroom_soup @Mek101 @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @Kagekokoro@neckbeard.xyz @Mikuchi @tigertaurus @Ricotta I always eat my steaks rare. I also love smoked salmon and gravlax. Really want to try mett though.
@Mek101 @tigertaurus @matana @autu886234 @mushroom_soup @TheAncestor @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @Kagekokoro@neckbeard.xyz @Mikuchi @Ricotta You obviously cook chicken all the way through. Beef you can eat raw if you cook the outside, and same with horse. Fish, and good cuts of pork you can eat completely raw.
Chicken is a really shitty meat on that kind of diet anyway. Very little fat.
@Mek101 @mushroom_soup @matana @TheAncestor @autu886234 @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @Kagekokoro@neckbeard.xyz @Mikuchi @Ricotta Why would you think that people always know what's better and are always heading towards it? That would be retarded if you have literally any political view other than "modernity is great"
@Mek101 @like50bears @matana @autu886234 @mushroom_soup @TheAncestor @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @Kagekokoro@neckbeard.xyz @Mikuchi @Ricotta Yeah, it's weird how you have flatscreens and netflix but can't afford having kids or buying a house.
One thing is just consumerism being retarded. People get used to a "higher standard" of living and then can't give it up. Housing thing especially is market manipulation, immigration, and restrictions on actually building them.
But a big thing too is that people adjust to the norm, and labour competes with labour. If you have women competing with men in the market place then there's 2x as much labour and 50% as much pay, and the thing you get in exchange is: cheaper consumables (yay!)
@MoralPanic @moth_ball @kino They wont tell you about the communist uprisings attempting to take over all of Europe, the original Antifa, the Weimar degeneracy, Jewish usury, international finance, or mention their connections to Jewry, but they will talk about how nobody ever liked Jews (through no fault of their own), and the Jewish soviets magically found that every holding camp on their side of Europe were death camps pretending to be showers that used lice pesticide, for some reason, while blaming the Germans for their own atrocities
They have a more subtle strategy now with a few holes patched up. Probably the biggest one is offering an alternative that's set up to fail
@moth_ball Probably yes. Then they cry about Nazis when r*ddit fucks with them. But you still need a larger picture for why you have democratic candidates proclaiming abortion rights for trans women without a uterus or the UN giving women a platform over being called whore on twitter, or why Europeans get arrested for questioning trannies/immigration/holocaust
@moth_ball @fbi @kino There has been deliberate social engineering for decades on behalf of giant [N]GOs and rich individuals. Social movement after social movement driven not by people but by media and big bodies pushing things in the current direction, then it peaked in mid the 2010s somehow for some reason
There's a big game that's much larger than just Disney acting in their own benefit.
@fbi @kino @moth_ball This happens even with non-profits. If it's from unis, that just delays the problem. Why are the unis like that? And why did every corp, NGO, and gov welcome them in?
@moth_ball @kino Why would journalists, NGOs, governments, and corporations all collectively decide to push an anti-white agenda even if it's to their own detriment? I'd say look at who operates them and try and distinguish a pattern, maybe then we can find a clear motive. Oh, wait
@moth_ball @kino They literally talk about collective action and struggles as the forefront issue
@kino @moth_ball It's never been popular, diversity stifles business competitiveness as much as anything, and they have nothing to gain by becoming political and cutting off a portion of consumers.
They're a big part of the problem but it has never benefited them. What is Disney gaining from this? It isn't even a political stunt, it's internal.
@qorg11 You fucking what? Ironic, yeah?
@middy
Most pathetic reply I've ever seen. You complain I don't explain how while quote mining me so you leave out my explanation and then say the studies say things they dont.
90% of what you said was a repeat of what you said before without addressing what I said, or just mention it and insult me without explaining anything.
Admitting either that species and races are legitimate or they both aren't is also funny.
>Thanks for the ancient low resolution study. Repeat the study with more nuanced labels.
I inb4d this with the "THE EXISTENCE OF PURPLE COMPLETELY DESTROYS THE CONCEPT OF COLOURS THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS RED OR BLUE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG" part, which you semi ignored semi admitted to and just pretended like it's okay for some taxa but not others, without explaining why.
>Stop ascribing intent to a natural physical process. It makes you look incredibly stupid.
And are really pretending to be stupid if you can't understand the way people talk about evolution as a process
>This article is giving plausible basis to an untested hypothesis, in order to grant justification for further research regarding that hypothesis
Direct lie
> In this manu-script a case is made for the hypothesis that H. sapiensis polytypic, and in this way is no different from other species exhibiting similar levels of genetic and morphological diversity. First it is demonstrated thatthe four major definitions of race/subspecies can be shown to be synonymous within the context of theframework of race as a correlation structure of traits. Next the issue of taxonomic classification is considered where it is demonstrated that H.sapiens possesses high levels morphological diversity, genetic heterozygosity and differentiation (FST) compared to many species that are acknowledged to be polytypic with respect to subspecies. Racial variation is then evaluated in light of the phylogenetic species concept,where it is suggested that the least inclusive monophyletic units exist below the level of species within H. sapiens indicating the existence of a number of potential human phylogenetic species; and the biological species concept, where it is determined that racial variation is too small to represent differentiation at the level of biological species
>Edwards' piece does not contradict Lewontin's data, nor does it attempt to
Strawman. Never said it does. His claims about it were fraudulent (though his data was wrong too (Fst 0.063 => 0.12 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23185452/)
>it is often stated that about 85% of the total genetical variation is due to individual differences within populations and only 15% to differences between populations or ethnic groups. [...] This conclusion (the data), due to R.C. Lewontin in 1972, is unwarranted because the argument ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data and not simply in the variation of the individual factors
>Edwards does not refute the variation claim
Direct lie
>These conclusions are based on the old statistical fallacyof analysing data on the assumption that it contains noinformationbeyondthatrevealedonalocus-by-locusanalysis,and then drawing conclusions solely on the results of such ananalysis. The ‘taxonomic significance’ of genetic data in factoftenarisesfromcorrelationsamongstthedifferentloci,foritisthese that may contain the information which enables a stableclassification to be uncovered
This is even talked about in the Woodley paper I linked. See image
>Then why did single celled organisms that could replicate themselves a massive number of times every single day and easily balloon their number into millions evolve into multicellular organisms that replicate at most once every nine months? Why isn't everything still bacteria, or kinds of insects that lays hundreds of eggs? At best you could argue that the 'goal' evolution is longevity of a genetic line, but even that would be wrong in the face of the fact that there is no intent and there is no objective goal.
You're also just illiterate about how evolution works
Here are some pointers:
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfish_DNA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene-centered_view_of_evolution
The amount of insults and anger in your reply and the "I'm done" really tells me everything I need to know about your confidence in your own viewpoint
Joined Apr 2021
