Categories For later read
He doesn't recognise this, of course, but means well, dissolving my annoyance into sadness.
Of course, he has hope for the future, because to recognise the truth would destroy his self-image as a fabulously successful individual.
The truth is that he & the White elite he belongs to have totally fucked up.
Western civilisation has a fatal flaw, which is leading to its self-destruction. It's a flaw inherent to ALL civilisations, which is why they NEVER last.
— Philosopher Kin vs Big Brother (@rogerahicks) July 12, 2019
It can be fixed, I believe, but only if recognised & understood, which demands an evolutionary perspective.
What does this have to do with Race (the fact that #DavidAttenborough is White), you ask?
Race is our largest kinship group, contempt for which lies at the heart of our civilisation's self-destructiveness. You can't truly care about anything, if you don't also care about that.
As a biologist, of all people, David Attenborough should recognise this, & how civilisation perverts & corrupts evolved human nature into prioritising personal POWER & advantage over kinship, but like #RichardDawkins & all the others, he fails to do so.
Why this failure, even of evolutionary biologists, to recognise the importance of kinship?
1) The state (#BigBrother) has always demanded that we prioritise loyalty to itself over kin.
2) The bonds of kinship are TRIBAL, which, in overreaction to Nazi tribalism, is demonised.
There\u2019s this crazy horseshoe where where having a strong emphasis on human sinfulness just turns into a power washer that blasts all harm and wrong-doing down to the same level of things people (re: men) inevitably do given half a chance. https://t.co/BLOWzpf1RA
— Laura Robinson (@LauraRbnsn) February 13, 2021
On the one hand, there's a high standard of holiness. On the other hand, there's a model of growth that is basically "Try Harder to Mean it More." Identify the relevant scriptural truth & believe it with all of your sincerity so that you may access the Holy Spirit's help to obey.
Helping sincere believers believe and obey the Bible facts is pretty much all the Holy Spirit does these days, other than convict us of our sins in light of the Bible facts.
If you know you are sincere and hate your sin and believe the right Bible facts as hard as you can but continue to be enslaved to your pornography addiction, what else left for you to do? Just Really, Just Really, Just Really Trust God and Give it to Him?
To suggest that there are other strategies available sounds to those formed in this model of growth like one is also suggesting that the Bible is insufficient, but it also suggests something just as threatening- that there are aspects of reality that are not immediately apparent.
Introducing our new series: “IDFN top 10 articles every fellow should read”🔖
#1: SAB management
by @mmcclean1 @LeMiguelChavez
Reviewers @KaBourgi, @IgeGeorgeMD, @Courtcita, @MDdreamchaser
We know is subjective & expect feedback/future improvements 👇
1. Clinical management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a review.
https://t.co/9tBCtp9mlP
👉 A must read written by Holland et al. where they review the evidence of the management of SAB.
2. Impact of Infectious Disease Consultation on Quality of Care, Mortality, and Length of Stay in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Results From a Large Multicenter Cohort Study.
https://t.co/XujO68pCuH
👉ID consult associated with reduced inpatient mortality.
3. Predicting Risk of Endocarditis Using a Clinical Tool (PREDICT): Scoring System to Guide Use of Echocardiography in the Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia
https://t.co/otcA1pxjAw
👉Predictive risk factors for infective endocarditis, and thus the need for TEE.
4. The Cefazolin Inoculum Effect Is Associated With Increased Mortality in Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.
https://t.co/CQZiryVWZz
👉Presence of cefazolin inoculum effect in the infecting isolate was associated with an increase 30-day mortality.
Over at Mischiefs of Faction, @Smotus makes a similar point: https://t.co/al6fS5tZXP
I want to be clear here: I’m saying that the Affordable Care act was, from a political perspective, badly designed, and that *a different health care plan* might’ve led to a better Dem performance in 2010. But these arguments don't grapple with that.
To @Smotus’s point, Pelosi released those House Democrats at the end, not the beginning. Having covered the beginning of this, I can tell you a lot of those Democrats thought a bipartisan health care bill would be great politics for them!
But they didn’t get that.
This is key. The ACA was built on the political theory that:
1. Bipartisan policy is easier to pass — and more popular once passed.
2. Working off of the Heritage Foundation/Romney template could get you a bipartisan health bill.
1 was probably right. 2 was utterly wrong.
Stephens goes on in his column (which never saw light of day) to cite famous Lee Atwater quote that uses racial slur, and which NYT has cited \u201cat least seven times.\u201d
— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) February 11, 2021
"Is this now supposed to be a scandal?\u201d he asks.
...
Four times. The column used the n-word (in the context of a quote) four times. https://t.co/14vPhQZktB
That is correct. In his draft he quotes Atwater using the word (4 times) and he does not redact it.
— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) February 11, 2021
For context: In 2019, a Times reporter was reprimanded for several incidents of racial insensitivity on a trip with high school students, including one in which he used the n-word in a discussion of racial slurs.
That incident became public late last month, and late last week, after 150 Times employees complained about how it had been handled, the reporter in question resigned.
In the course of all that, the Times' executive editor said that the paper does not "tolerate racist language regardless of intent.” This was the quote that Bret Stephens was pushing back against in his column. (Which, again, was deep-sixed by the paper.)
Another reason you are dead within 1.5 seconds of encountering your first fast zombie, is adrenaline.
The Tueller Drill is interesting.https://t.co/D6p3zRRV52
— Anosognosiogenesis (@pookleblinky) December 20, 2020
Most people who get attacked with a knife and survive to talk about it, say they never even knew a knife was there.
Or that they'd been stabbed, until after the fact.
In many cases, they think they'd just been punched, and are completely surprised
One reason the adage is "the winner is the one who dies in the ambulance, not the gutter," is because it's entirely possible to receive a fatal wound, not realize it, and then inflict a fatal wound on the other guy without *him* realizing it.
A dozen times within 30 seconds.
The marker drill teaches how you *will* get cut, fatally, without realizing it.
In full adrenaline freakout, this is even more pronounced.
then @peregrimmer is going to show how to make disappeared info reappear: "as if by magic." #lawOfFunny #ScipionicTroll#peirce
— the squad (6'3") (@RafasItchyButt) December 13, 2020
giordano bruno was burned for having a good memory. socrates warned against writing things down since the power to write history is the power to direct a nation by deceit.
there is a tale of a man from Russia who had a perfect memory. perfect eidetic recall.
a buddy of mine always pointed out that you could always bring a random dot stereogram test to arbitrary precision until he flunked. the guy who passed would be a God.
due to its full taps of the Internet, the NSA can compare moment to moment data and figure out stuff like CIA media manipulation.
Ignore ‘cases’, look instead only at excess deaths (per M Levitt’s tweet). Does that look characteristic of an epidemic? It’s completely diff from spring or any winter flu outbreak.
London:
Can anyone explain why there is no ‘2nd wave’ of excess deaths in London, without invoking herd immunity?
It’s not lockdown. See NW England:
This is the largest #SecondaryRipple (which I predicted).
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
Now check the 3 predictions I made months ago. They’ve all happened. Compare predictions from SAGE’s statements: they’re all wrong.
Even neutrals at this point might ask themselves “if he’s been right on all predictions, maybe he’s correct now?”
I’ve been saying since the Lighthouse Labs got up & running that I’m deeply sceptical about the trustworthiness of their ‘cases’ data. I showed how, at low virus prevalence, the PCR mass testing data was throwing out potentially 90% positives being
https://t.co/t4qQN4rH0u
I got ‘fact checked’ a LOT over that statement. This paper just published, about precisely that time period I speculated about. Turns out that high-80s% of Dr Healy’s positives by PCR were FALSE. This alone is sufficient in my view to throw severe doubt...