How to insult JR the elitist (by Harry Lieberwirth)

It was never -me- that made my intellect out as though it makes me better than anyone.. the only one that cares whether another is smarter than them, and judges themselves or the other based on that, is the one that is insecure about their intellect. They dont like having their self-estimated lack of intellect confirmed. Suck it.

  • You like this.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People are afraid of being tricked or betrayed etc. so they use “social validation” instead of rational logic. In other words, if something is familiar or popular, that can be preferable over something that one has observed to be valid or accurate.sotheir intellect is not even at issue usually. It is just the emotional reptilian part of the brain that is activated and the rational part of the brain can be involved to rationaliZe the emotional domination. But the emotional domination is not the result of intellectual discernment. It is like criticiZing someone that their dream is stupid. Dreams can be stupid. It is stupid to use the framework of the awake state to criticize the logical continuity of dreams.it is like criticizing someone who is drunk for showing signs of intoxication.

    I have made a few things lately about the cultivation of social anxiety through schools and media. The effectiveness of the common programming is quite extensive.

    5 hrs · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I believe that at least at this point, they dont need any help at all being always occupied with social appearance and not, ya know, using reason, which is what makes this day different from the dark ages. They are sufficiently gullible and stupid to keep this going without help from some spooky shadow government or school. Its what these people do naturally, at this point, they would still be doing it even if it wasn’t encouraged. I suspect that the majority of people simply lack the mental faculties to engage in logic and reason..even if freed from that social bind – born to be a box lifter -and that is fine, but then they get it in their head that they can be more and they start making assertions of how reality works.Sorry, I’aint saying they cannot, just that I only listen to those that use logic, reason, and rationalism, scientific method, when it comes to claims to the nature of anything, because they can actually show, share their findings, and the rest just has anecdotal words, which evidence nothing but a single instance of whatever. Antibiotics, at least, do what they are claimed to do, they kill certain microorganisms including beneficial ones – they work the same, in 99% of all instances, whereas anecdotes are usually just speaking about one single instance where a certain effect was perceived to be had.. science among other things entails testing something on a dozen to a thousand people at the same place and timeframe to see if the effect is always the same.. so if someone is so sure that ”marijuana cures skincancer”, and they want to show that to be true, the way to do it is getting hundred people together and applying the same oil to their cancers. If true, a significant amount of people will be cured, and it will all be neatly documented. But apparently if someone’s cancer happens to recede, and that person had applied the oil, it must for sure mean it was that oil and not just coincidental. 10 times over or I’m not listening, mr cow cream wink emoticon
    5 hrs · Edited · Unlike · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People are capable of reason. Shame and resignation and divisiveness are programmed very deliberately… and effectively.When reading the writings of Edward Bernays, who wroteabut how he deceived the US in to entering World War 1, he is very clear.He deliberately created a hysteria about patriotism and “our obligation to the victims of the Germans.” Whether his accusations about the Germans were actually accurate was apparently not something that mattered much to people once their initial emotional triggers were activated.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction or any involvement in 9/11? It does not matter now.70+ years after the US occupied Germany and Japan to end World War 2, we still have military bases there. Was there any intentional deception ever used in any war? I certainly hope not because deception is a very bad thing. In fact, Santa Claus was very clear to me that if I told lies that he would not give me that Hot Wheels toy car that I said I really wanted.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Your dismissal of the cow cream thing does not interest me. If you are skeptical, I don’t mind. If you dismiss it, I still don’t mind. If you say you are interested but then do not gather your own 10+ subjects to conduct the test yourself, then well I may have already stopped listening by then… too busy chuckling.
  • Harry Lieberwirth I am skeptical. I would be very willing to see tests of raw vs processed food sources, absorption rates, etc, but I leave providing the evidence to a claim, with the claimant. I have no interest in actually sciencing, because I dont make a lot of claims that I feel invested in showing are true. And like I said, the one that makes the claim can go and get the evidence, if there is any. Which is one part of the scientific method and the secular practice called rationalism. The reasoning is that if I claim there is a tea pot floating between mars and earth somewhere, I could not reasonably expect anyone to take me very seriously, let alone leave it up to them to disprove -my- claim, when I can just change my story saying they must have missed it when they find none.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn A quick thought experiment: among mammals, what percentage of mothers produce cooked breast milk to provide through their nipples to the infants? What percentage of mothers produce raw breast milk?
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth 100%. But natural does not imply healthier. I would have to actually look into this but I think the research I would refer to would claim that cooking any organic makes the cell-walls weaken which like marrow from a bone makes it easier to absorb the nutrients. I don’t know which is healthier for sure though. As for natural = better – Arsenic is 100% all natural too, wanna try? wink emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for floating teapots, a fundamental issue is relevance. To me, I favor “extra” skepticism toward any content that some group of people intentionally gathered and formulated to publicize to me and millions or billions of others. I understand that I have been programmed to presume as relevant whatever they programmed me to value. I have been programmed to devalue and deem irrelevant things by them as well.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I understand that networks of coercive wealth redistribution promote compliance through words like “patriotism.” I respect that. I may not comply, but I respect their methods and their results.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Arsenic is an element that is in every molecule of Vitamin B-17. Just because a human can drown in water does not mean water is fundamentally dangerous.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth True, basic chemistry, dosage creates toxicity, the idea of toxic substances is a misunderstanding.Here I found the tea pot examplehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

    Russell’s teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot…
    EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
    1 hr · Edited · Unlike · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Another thought experiment: take a chunk of raw meat, a chunk of well-done cooked meat, an ear of raw corn, and an ear of cooked corn. Then, set them all outdoors and wait for insects to gather. Would you be surprised if 3 of the items received no flies (and no maggots), while one got all the flies (and all of the maggots)? Eventually, there would also be mold on one ear of corn (and the cooked meat).
    1 hr · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Funny how micro and macro disagree, because animals go crazy for cooked over raw, a lot of the time, meat in particular. ( would have to look that up I may be wrong) Anyway I’m abstaining from drawing the conclusion that you are right, or wrong, for now, but I will be looking at what you’re implying.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The smell of cooked meat is stronger, but once the sharks gather, they go for bloody carcasses, not steaming meatloaf fresh out of the oven.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Bones are a bit different. Snakes do just fine with digesting bones, but bone gelatin is easy for me to swallow personally than a cow’s skull.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ok, I just skimmed the teapot link. Yes, rationality has it’s advantages, eh?
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Its easy to show eachother nothing but words, but I will try that expirement a couple of times perhaps. I know ants dont touch margerine, but even then, I have no reason to trust an insect or microbial lifeform’s instinct as proof of anything. Humans are stupid as shit, and they’re huge, what makes you think them tinies have to necessarily pick the one that is actually healthy? It isnt healthiness that makes most animals pick foods, and if offered raw vs fried stake, it is the smell of the cooked one that will attract them more. Maybe cooked foods just smell like shit to moulds and microbes
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Apricot kernels are a seed that has a lot of B-17 (& arsenic). However, those are known for reversing and preventing cancer, not poisoning anyone.
  • Harry Lieberwirth This is why I prefer to not be on the side to prove anything. I can always think of reasons why it doesnt necessarily prove anything tongue emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Although many people may hysterically FEAR eating apricot kernels and their CAUTION is quite rational, though perhaps erroneous.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Mold is not an animal with a nose or olfactory sensitivity.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Again, cooked food will be easier to smell, but you can test for attracting creatures with cooked food and then having a few cooked and raw options. I would be surprised if you cared enough to do an experiment, but when I have left out raw meat, I then ate the flies and the maggots along with the meat. wink emoticon I am very serious.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I have eaten them, my father is into stuff like that, and he fed them to his dog, whom had cancer. I find it hard to claim it cured him, I would want to see the same thing with 12 other dogs or more.. and a lot of that stuff is ”evidenced” by anecdotal attempts to prove something but not taking care to read up on what the steps of the scientific method are, since it is that method that defines something as being scientific, and if it doesnt follow those steps, however much it seems to evidence something, I can’t really say its scientific – and most anecdotal articles skip huge swaths of the method, not just one or two steps. Make claim, provide no source, claim it is reader’s responsibility to disprove claims that only the writer cares much for. I dont honestly care in most cases whether I am arguing right or wrong because in actual science, the facts reveal themselves at the end of the process and are usually beyond doubt. There are a couple specific scientific ways to create technologies, and many, many more ways to not succeed, and facts always have an application that can be exploited, tech is what I take to be proof of scientific method’s efficacy. When did permaculturalists, naturalists, and health fad people last come up with a result to their anecdotal testing that resulted in the creation of anything that didnt already exist 500 years ago? Waving around the old and familiar as valid just because its old and familiar, that must make it time tested? Well, popular abrahamic religion stood that test, no results beyond second rate taoist interpretation possibly. Just cuz its old doesnt mean it isnt useless for anything but a reason to repress having certain thoughts or feelings. Asbestos was timetested aswell, used that shit for decades if not more, because, we always had, so why not right. I am not very serious but I enjoy poking holes in other’s reasoning almost as much as I enjoy being scientifically proved wrong.. in the end we all win if we get to the kind of facts that have applications. Other facts may be totally uninteresting to me. One proves its power, takes a whole race of hominids out of the dark ages, the other, well, even if a fact, is literally useless. And if it turns out it isnt then cool. The pragmatism of science attracts me, not the opportunities to show how right I am or how wrong others are – I just save the spiteful U R WRONG for the morally dogmatic. Pisses them off, which makes me laugh a little.
  • Harry Lieberwirth You comprehend me well. Indeed, probably dont care enough to do so. xD I would if someone I knew would be in need of an alternative to say chemo therapy. But I dont really have a lot of reasons to do more than just speak of it and read about it, as a form of entertainment equal to say watching a tv show. Discussions for the sake of the discussion. The real facts always show themselves eventually, so I’m not too worried with invalidating unscientific anecdotal approaches.. they usually dont result in useful data so they do that all on their own tongue emoticon And just because I do not trust an industry, doesnt mean I think they are all out to get me. It sounds paranoid, even if I always used to see conspiracies everywhere. I saw a scientific article on the psychology of conspiricy thinking, it looked right through me. I’ve been changing my tune every time I found myself being wrong, and in the end, its the best move I ever made. I have a distrust of any large industry or group, and I realize they will likely use their influence to serve themselves more than me – knowing that, I dont see them as a problem. They sell drugs, most of which functions as described, some of which I use, but none of which I pay for. 100 euros a month out of my welfare cheque for insurance and all the pills I could take are free of charge aside a 250 a year extra since 2013. So I have no stake in any of it, I just thought I did at some point. Why should I care, they take good care of me, I dont feel like biting the hand that feeds.Yay welfare nation.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Yes there is a primary issue of what pragmatic results are interesting (and when, in what order, etc).
    58 mins · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Yes, I advocate paranoia (or caution that others might call paranoia) in regard to mainstream quack medicine, especially in regard to certain treatment methods that I know to be detrimental and/or when I know a much more favorable method.
    55 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I appreciate your honesty and openness but I cannot count personal experience as a sound way to verify anything for anyone else but that one subject’s instance. It evidences to an extent, that it is far more favorable, for you, but I am aware of how different ”types”, whether that is down to blood type or something else, lets say different constitutions, respond differently to the same thing. My ex used to almost die when eating red meat, does that also prove it is favorable to never eat red met for anyone but her and those like her?
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn For instance, the US government has had a program to compensate
    people injured by vaccines since the 1980s. The data to support the theory behind vaccinations is also “extremely weak.”
    However, when a treatment method is extremely profitable, that allows for a lot of budget for lobbying and advertising. Which treatments get publicized most: the most profitable ones or the most effective ones? Effectiveness is simply not relevant in regard to many promotions.http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html

    National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, VICP
    HRSA.GOV
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I won’t argue generally speaking with anyone who says “the government is taking good care of me (in regard to education or health or personal safety / gun control).” If you are satisfied with that, then there may be something else of more interest to you currently.
  • Harry Lieberwirth True, but every dealer knows selling crappy dope is bad for business. It might have averse effects on a minority, quite possible and common even with paracetamol, but if everyone ever vaccinated got autism or anxiety issues, there would be a lot of autistic and anxious people, more than there are. Its easy to not notice all the relaxed nice people that dont have something to defend when I want to see proof of what I believe is true.. but for me it is evidence first, belief second. I abstain from comitting to believing for or against untill someone using the scientific method confirms it. I just feel like it is a great way to save myself the time of being recruited to someone else’s cause, because the anecdotal naturalist more often than not is more concerned rallying people to the cause of morally disapproving and verbally and socially ”going to war” against a certain institute. But I do not see any institute as my enemy. I see people that prefer moral value judgments as a focal point that would have me rebel against an industry I would be a hypocrite for attacking. Wrong guy, they own me xD
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Some treatment methods are so favorable to a government that a government will make those treatments mandatory (conditional for things like working in the medical field, going to a public school, receiving public welfare, etc). Vaccinations (in much of the world) have recently been made mandatory. Someone really wanted that policy implemented in many countries.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am aware of ample evidence of the dangers of vaccinations and rather little evidence of benefit. Same thing for statin medications (which effectively impair the function of the liver). I have seen the research showing the consistent decrease in health for those taking statin medications (relative to a control group). However, the profits from statin usage continues to pile up. Scientific accuracy was never a primary issue.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Again, aspartame (“nutrasweet”) is a very clear case. The substance was rejected as clearly harmful, then a new wave of lobbying began and eventually it was approved anyway. There was no controversy about the science showing that it was harmful. They simply approved it when enough political will (bribes, assassinations, etc) was exerted.
  • Harry Lieberwirth So no offense, but do you enjoy not being listened to to the extent of the other saying I get you and agree? Does that ever happen at all? tongue emoticon – I’m slightly poking fun at you here, but again, no offense, I get that you might find this important, and I respect that, but I also respect my own lack of interest in showing those dirty corrupt industrialists and oligarch madmen that we will not submit. I just sort of lost wanting to wage war on corrupt elitists. We the people pay them to lie to us, maybe so, but if so, I find we the people guilty of being deserving of being deceived and abused – we pay them to do so after all right? So nvm raising awareness against possibly corrupt intent, and nvm bothering with these fools.. they all have it coming. At least I know who I am in bed with, quite possibly.
    Anyway Maybe you’re like me, talk for entertainment purposes and dont at all mind me poking fun at ya.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The anti-fat hysteria led to the obesity epidemic. When Sweden’s government reversed their anti-fat hysteria and allowed the teaching of why bodies (like cows) manufacture fat and how most types of fat are beneficial and/or essential for health, then what happened to Sweden’s obesity rate? It plunged.The idea that all fat is “poisonous” is absurd. Again, much of the mainstream medical religion is totally absurd.
    38 mins · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Yes, mainstream science actually agrees there since a year or something. Now they say its carbs that pose most danger.
  • Harry Lieberwirth The idea that any substance is poisonous by default is absurd. Basic chemistry shows even arsenic in minute doses is harmless.. cyanide in kernels is harmless, all about dosage. I think you are combatting an aged version of mainstream science, I am not familiar with some of those claims but they sound like something the 80’s may have taken as fact when it was lacking. Science last I read agrees on the harmless nature of fats, though there is still a media frenzy saying saturated fats are bad. They arent scientists and do not speak for them however. Maybe the model you criticize is the one you grew up under. They definitely change stuff around, but thats the point of being willing to admit being wrong to get to the useful facts.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn It is a bit absurd to say that “carbs” are dangerous. Carbs are less metabolically efficient than fat as fuel. Fat is essential for reasons other than fuel. Generally speaking, carbs are not essential and are only useful as fuel. That is my understanding at least.Lactose is a sugar that mammals create for breast milk. It is for fuel. As for other fibers like plant fiber, they are like the bones that give a plant stability.The idea that humans NEED to eat plant fibers is very strange. Why would carb be so high in a classroom’s dietary recommendations? There is no scientific basis, but a commercial basis.

    32 mins · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn To clarify, I am an elitist, not an anti-elitist.
    31 mins · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Nah I mean they found that the amount of carbs modern people eat is dangerous, not carbs in and of themselves. But bottles of coke every day, donuts, high sugar food, they say it would be healthier to eat fatties.
  • Harry Lieberwirth I edited my previous post please refresh btw.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The fact that the tax extortion system is supported by the masses does not have any connection to me to guilt or “deserving it.” It is like deserving a hurricane or earthquake in one city but not the next one over.
    30 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth So maybe you are actually opposed to the media-driven image of scientific concensus, but it is very easy to pretend in a commercial that ”we are being scientific” when they are not. Maybe the marketing teams pretending to be representative of any actual scientist is the issue.
  • Harry Lieberwirth No, being stupid enough to pay one’s abuser for the abuse, makes them deserve it. Paying for a hurricane to come my way if that were possible makes me someone I wouldnt feel a need to help.
  • Harry Lieberwirth You may be an elite-ist, but you ain’t rich enough to be elite! Ok I’m gonna go do something else besides poking fun at you while you try to make a point tongue emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn oops- yeah that might have been cyanide not arsenic. eh, close enough for jazz…..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The consumption of processed vegetable oils by humans is quite new (except for olive oil, coconut oil, and a few others). It is the cooked seed oils (corn oil, canola oil, etc) that are new.When saturated fats were demonized, that was by the marketers who were trying to figure out “how can we get schools and fast food restaurants and everyone else to use our products, such as margarine? how can we get them to be terrified of butter etc?”The anti-fat hysteria campaigns were then designed and implemented in schools. Soon, government outlawed the use of saturated fats in certain fast food applications. That paved the way for huge profits for the new seed oils, which are universally recognized as harmful for humans (among competent biochemists… to the very best of my knowledge).

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As noted many months ago, sodas are harmful mostly for the acidity, not just the sugar. Diet sodas also typically are sweetened with the popular neurotoxin aspartame (“nutrasweet”).
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Media is secondary. You have to turn that on. Schools are primary. Attendance is mandatory, with limited exceptions.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The teacher says “cholesterol is a substance that every liver on the planet makes to poison you.” The students generally say “I want to know what claim to repeat on the test (without regard for the absurdity of the claim).”Schools are the primary programming rituals for groupthink and social anxiety. They are where intelligence is shut down and chronic physical tensions to repress shamed emotions are deepened. Rationality is generally unwelcome, but there are exceptions that the school system encourages and rewards socially.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Students are encouraged to focus their rationality on the science fair project (perhaps as long as they do not directly challenge the central slogans of mainstream medical quackery).
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am not opposed to how the media programs. I respect how the media programs.
  • Harry Lieberwirth Just know that I am not invested in you being wrong or anything. I am a skeptic and suspicious of any groups whatsoever including pharma industry. They arent selling cures, they are selling repression, but without the effects manually repressing emotions (through morality and verbal imposition). Risperidone makes me think less, makes my own thought process more enjoyable, more orderly and overseeable. I know who I’m paying and what for.. so maybe they are the enemy of those that believe their pills are cures, but I am well aware there is a reason to not support that approach since symptom repressers are good for return business. School taught me that, first I feared groups of people, they always get this attitude like the fucking dogs they are, always so ballsy when in a pack. Now I play Bear Mauls the Wolves and actually enjoy fucking with social groups. But the dynamic of people groups and industrial businesses are very different. The former tend to demand compliance when all they are is a weaker version of the guys in blue and green with no way to back up and enforce their imposed opinions, unless they are so called white or black trash, always ready to compensate violence for their lack of capacity for words. All off topic here, but being the focus of an entire group that is angry is less fun than many things, but given they arent a physical threat, I quite enjoy riling them up by saying the opposite of what they claim is true and moral. But thats just social groups, cliques, classes, clubs. I dont pick fights I can’t win, like rallying my friends into realizing someone is taking them for a ride… let em find out in their own time or not.. I want pharma in business, I am a loyal customer, and actually, being against them would just make me a huge pill chugging hypocrite. Actually anyone that claims to oppose symptom repressing medicine industries but takes painkillers sometimes or often, would be a hypocrite in my eyes. I know you arent against them, like you said you are an elitist, but you must realize that when someone you know realized for the first time that they have been taken advantage of or just misinformed as to how the medicine works, they will get angry. Spare them, I will.. not care the slightest for them unless they come to me and ask me for my views, I do. I have nothng to lose or gain in their typical, or stereo typical rage against the machine. So original, sticking it to the man. That is so common now that it is no longer edgy, its way more edgy to be like ‘fuck yeah elitist moneymakers!’ and supporting the man since everyone nowadays is a fricking punkrock hippie. Funny, I dont wanna be common, so I refuse to remain anti esteablishment if that is more common than pro. I just wanna take the piss and enjoy my time and exorbitant wealth while it lasts.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Imagine that the USA’s diplomat goes to Iraq and says “we have a plan for the future of Iraq. Our plan is that the Iraqi public including you will buy a lot of stuff from us that you do not really need. You will pay a very FAIR PRICE for it, which we will dictate to you. You will say you like the price because it is so fair. We will punish you severely for ineffectiveness in regard to public support for the program. We will also train you to effectively obtain the compliance of your constituents.”What is weird about that? Diplomacy is not that explicit. The threats are usually much less direct. The blackmail and bribery can be very complex and subtle.
    6 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Nothing at all, its how probably many people do their business deals. But groups of peasants with some top 10 list of do’s and don’ts do not have the actual force that makes the government and business elite capable of backing up their impositions. Little social groups aside gang rape and beating me up can do shit all in their PC all words no balls approach.

     

  • Harry Lieberwirth Groups of commoners, of civilians, put 10 humans in a room and they will soon have a pecking order and group morality norm that if not obeyed is ”enforced” with stares, verbal aggression, forced isolation. Like any of those are actually coercive. I just dont play along with that bullshit, in person, people are way different, one on one, those same people, apart, arent the same, but when people group up they always seem to think their flaky alliance amounts to being able to impose their brand of morality on anyone within the group. No way no game! Not that I could bring myself to play anything but a joker in a group even if I wanted to.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn My basic point is that diversity is wrong. Nature should not have so much diversity. Nature should have consulted with me first before producing all this diversity.Diversity is variety, and variety is inequality, and inequality is wrong. That is what I have been trying to tell you all along, dude.
Advertisements

Tags:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: