Sci politic views
Eco and Climate Change
I am scientodific. I accept the scientific method. Here is some background
I support facts and logic. I am against reason and science being subordinated to the principles of “social justice”"
All science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided."
-- Capital Vol. III
Climate mobilization can help negate anti blackness, bigotry and oppression and unite people while fighting climate change at the same. So we need more climate mobilization:
The climate mobilization recently showed how interconnected groups can work together to build political power around a platform of climate, jobs and justice. Organizations like the Sierra Club and the People’s Climate March, for instance, are thankfully doing more work to protect voting rights in marginalized communities — the same predominately black and Latino communities that are the most likely to suffer from environmental injustice and the most reliable voters for environmental champions.
We need to protect the environment and fight the state!
Science and Pyschology are not infallibe and they are wrong at least some of the time (they are HUMANS not Gods). On reincarnation, afterlife, multiverse, whether to wear heavy boots , sandals and wedged shoes while driving, about the benefits of sanctuary cities, women marrying much younger men, whether to lightly spank your child ,some politically correct issues, whether people should wear padded or high top tennis shoes, CRT, any view by them that supports kids under 9 becoming Transgender they are wrong or misleading .
However, Scientists and shrinks are right most of the time but it can be a slippery slope if they go beyond even the things above.
Academics and Experts (i.e Psychologists) should not use their elite status, credentials and moral authority to dictate how our country is run when it comes to issues like the non scientific ones above or especially slippery slope issues from those issues. We have to stop our society from embracing this cult of the expert.
I am against pollution particularly because pollution violates the NAP
Clean air bills and clear skies bills are crypto anti-environmental bills due to them slapping a clean label on our huge carbon footprint and its enabling industries. This is because we don’t have enough green (environmentalists) in impactful political positions and this needs to change. Thus I support the message of the film Planet of the Humans by Michael Moore. See here for more
I also agree with Greta Thunberg criticizing the UN COP27 for its greenwashing (see here and here) . She is right about this and I am glad she called them out on it
I am pro environment but I am against the far left fringe of the environmental movement and minor things (non deal breakers) within the left wing of the movement
I support Degrowth
My views on the environment generally match the Five Star Movement's environmental views
I care for the environment, unlike the climate change denier fascists
I support a “modern day Noah’s Ark’ like what Bill Bradley wanted to do here
I accept the hard truth of climate change
I believe Climate Change is real ie I believe that the earth's atmosphere warmed one or two degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Centigrade) during the 20th century. Most of this warming is man-made. The warming is likely to continue and to be harmful to human, animal and plant life. We must all work together to stop it by reducing emission of greenhouse gases
I support the environment, natural resources and ecological conservation . I promote this preservation of our environment and natural resources along with conservation that is not at the expense of the eco system or individual rights
In the 2000s decade I used to be a free-market environmentalist, I assert private property rights in relation to environmental protection and pollution prevention.
However I changed. I became part Eco Left Wing Paleo Bull Moose Progressive
This means that I support preserving (conserving) the natural habitat and the national identity of our nations (basic National identity) in order to complement each other in a common sense way. This is to conserve elements of the past ecologically and culturally (as noted and outlined in each section of my blog)
Basically on the environment/eco system, I can be seen as ‘conservative’ but only on the environment/eco system in that I want us to preserve/conserve the environment/eco system (through green policies, degrowth, allowing nature to reclaim urban land etc) like how conservatives want to preserve/conserve traditional cultural values
The Industrial revolution, gas vehicles, non green electricity and similar anti green elements all supplanted our traditions just as much as cultural things did and thus both should be dealt with similarly (as noted and outlined in each section of my blog)
In part because of that ,I can get net zero greenhouse emissions by 2062 . In some ways I am a complete evangelist for carbon capture and storage, a ten point plan for green industrial revolution (if it is anything like the Industrial Revolution but for green energy that is base ,especially since that would reverse the damage to our planet that the industrial revolution has done), cutting methane emissions by 25 percent by the year 2039, cutting what I deem as carbon emissions by 70 percent by the 2040s (give or take many years) and climate finance and green bonds (I had a savings account as a kid, bonds are related to savings accounts so hence my support) .
I like electric vehicles for personal reasons (ie futuristic sci fi) and it would be nice to be in an old school way to be without petrol and diesel automobiles since I like retro things and having vehicles that aren’t powered by petrol or diesel is retro. See this for a different take on this
I am fine with Malcolm Turnbull’s National Energy Guarantee
I do not believe that Environmental Racism is true.
This climate change activist is a woke, quitter,and a snowflake. I condemn her for quitting, since her excuse for quitting was lame and braindead. She doesn’t give a fuck about the planet, and her stupid , senseless woke views warped her mind, She needs mental health, because she is a nut. But some counterpoints and more analysis I tend to be ok with over here
Even though I believe in Climate Change I don't believe that Colonial, racist or patriarchal systems created or fueled it. Climate Change is not a manner of human rights. I do agree with Greta Thunberg's reasonable views on climate change, but I do not agree with Greta Thunberg's occasional cringe left views on climate change
While I believe in Climate Change, I don't believe that the tail end worst case predictions of Climate Change will ever happen.
I reject Deep Adaption and Jem Bernall's Deep Adaption. Their climate predictions are too pessimistic.
On climate change I am closer to supporting Productivism than to being a Climate Change apocalype person. Though I do have a tendency to be like Post Conservative on Climate Change apocalype things
Climate Change Apocalypse predictions may really be pointing to the Biblical Apocalypse (ie using the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse imagery).
Some fellow greens are hypocrites on Climate Change and there is nothing wrong with pointing that out in order to get them to not have slip ups. I have a recommendation for energy conservation - Let's keep the private jets on the ground. See here for more
I don't believe that people who don't believe in Climate Change should be labeled as Climate Change deniers or harassed or shamed for their naive beliefs (and certainly not labeled divisive names like 'Climate Change deniers'). I say, educate them on Climate Change and if they still don't believe it, let it go.
We should follow religion or our conscious and be stewards for Earth ,regardless if you believe there is Climate Change or no Climate Change
I am against Eric Adams banning meat or reducing the consumption of meat in NYC. That is authoritarian and evil to ban people from eating meat or to reduce their meat consumption. It is a violation of bodily autonomy/personal autononmy, and the rights to their justified . And no Eric Adams being a vegan himself is no excuse for his meat bans.
It's one thing if it was to have people eat healthier but to do it to stop climate change is indefensible. Banning meat or reducing meat consumption won't stop climate change and anyone who says otherwise is a greenwashed woke retard.
These Liberal 2.0 morons are hypocrites. They won't ban weed, alchohol, porn, drag shows for kids, trans kids becoming trans but they will ban people from eating meat or eating as much meat as they want, ban people from owning gas cars, ban people from . and similar examples. When these green freaks like Eric Adams stops drinking beer and doing weed then I will do my part and give up meat, and gas powered things. Otherwise FUCK OFF green freaks
I am against all prohibitionist campaigns of all sorts including climate change bans like meat, gas powered stuff etc and I respect people’s control over their bodies and justly acquired possessions (justly acquired possessions including meat, gas powered stuff etc)
I feel that all aggression-based limits on all favored and disfavored but voluntary exchanges should be disallowed
I do have a few other side political post position views views on Climate Change once in a blue moon
If Climate Change deniers would prevent climate change from happening, then we will defeate Climate change and then no one will talk about climate change threats or pass climate change laws again since we will have defeated climate change thus there would be no need for those things anymore
I also believe Climate Change has positive effects and may be a good thing: Warmer winters and thus fewer winter deaths, lower energy costs, better agricultural yields, fewer droughts, maybe richer biodiversity see this for more https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/are-there-positive-benefits-global-warming
I am against the governments using climate change lockdowns in the future
I do want to know why 5 percent of mainstream scientists don't believe in man made climate change/climate change so I can maybe help them believe in climate change and at the very least to ask them what they would do to fix our Earth’s major eco and environmental problems despite them having the position that they do
I don't believe that climate change will happen on my 'past life/future life' planets that are in other solar systems, galaxies or universes
Our eco systems (which guarantee life and the survival of thousands of animal and plant species) are being destroyed and these political consequences are of a productive model of accumulation and consumption, which is based on an increasingly extreme capitalism, which has morphed since the 1980s in its latest version of neoliberalism.
The concentration and Conservation of natural resources, by a select few, and those resources‘ waste by certain minority of the planet caused, among other problems, climate change
Our economic crisis is also an environmental crisis/climate change along with the scarcity of natural resources are the origin of most of our geopolitical conflicts and migration criseses.
This model has been shown to be speculatively short term,, unsustainable and pretty unfair, causing the enrichment of a minority of the planet’s population at the expense of the overexploitation of natural resources causing problems and exhaustion for future generations.
We should recognize in the face of this impoverishment and access difficulties for the majority and the At the same time, we should recognize the changes in individual behavior to help and support a change in the model that makes our society sustainable
I support environmentalism that is not mistaken about who the real people are
Like the fault of evictions (like during recessions) is not of some families that supposedly lived beyond their means, but is of a speculative and pirate type financial/economic system that has been played in a casino savings of the working people, climate change is similarly not to blame for the consumption habits of humble people but instead for the great economic powers who have benefited from the extractive economy.
I acknowledge that ordinary people develop the habit of recycling, knowing perfectly well that 30 percent of the greenhouse gases emitted into our planet’s atmosphere during the last 50 years comes from only twenty global companies.
Our environmentalism activism must promote a multidisciplinary approach which is included in different fields of political action: including in the management of energy and water resources to land-urban planning and management, housing access and mobility, a smart food and health consumption policy linked to daily problems such as local air pollution and waste management.
I am fine with tools which expands traditional speeches of our green parties aimed mainly at urban, university and activist classes (in a non ‘college liberal’ way), that can be labor claim integrated , improving public services like access to education, water, food production, energy, transport etc promote preservation for the future
We must bet on the economy to be back at the service of the people , natural resources, way of life and no the other way around
The territorial component has to be quintessential and strike a balance in the rural and urban sphere that passes through an improved balance of our existing distribution of power, through necessary transition towards transformational models and different distributed resources, reconciling the preservating natural heritage of the rural environment with improving the living conditions of our population, with a focused leading role which goes beyond the subaltern thinking of simple pantry or resource source for large cities, while valuing the legacy, experience and knowledge of our lands and their interconnected plural reality.
In nature we see a needed connectedness and interrelationship which show us that all things are of equal importance to the functioning of the Earth, plants-shrubs, stones, nothing but humans are the top and nothing is at the bottom, there is one single unit below humans. We have a synergy with our lands
But we still need to be at one with nature. We have to save our forests, so our ovens don't become cold when it gets colds and so our life continues to thrive on this planet.
We need to protect our forests and nature from deforestation, invasive species (which are unnatural), and from urban expansion and exploitation so nature always has a place for us.
We also need to make sure people who destroy such natural environments don't do so and to possibly have them move to other areas as to reclaim such areas if they are truly beyond saving.
Too much mass migration and illegal immigration might have ecological drawbacks. Some people say that too much migration and illegal immigration causes damage to the environment and contributes to climate change: https://discovery.dundee.ac.uk/files/28050006/SHIVA_Mehdi_Final_20180815a.pdf Since I am not a scientist I can't tell if they are right or not but its worth a read . Of course climate change may cause increased migration and illegal immigration so it is a chicken or the egg type of argument if true
If true, these drawbacks are drawbacks that leads to more expansion which leads to nature and forests being replaced with towns ,cities, roads, highways, taking away that beautiful nature and forests
I half heartily conditionally support something between Eco Alter Isolationism/Eco Night Watchman’s State (19th. Century Britain Splendid Isolationism) and Eco unilateralism along with Eco Protectionism by the US and some of their allies
The US and some of their allies would use something between Eco Alter Isolationism/Eco Night Watchman’s State (19th. Century Britain Splendid Isolationism) and Eco unilateralism along with Eco Protectionism toward countries (like China) that don’t take steps to curb the eco system/environmental damage and climate change. These measures would not be removed until those countries take climate change and protection of the eco system more seriously
Basically using Degrowth to make those people sacrifice their self interests (like by not being materialistic or consumerist) for the wellness of our planet .
We need to use non Liberal 2.0 , non globalist and non globalization in our ecological fight to preserve our environment and planet
We need to promote a green healthy planet by getting people in less environmentally progressive countries to implement and embrace the same types of exaggerated green policies and exaggerated pro eco policies that right wing anti environmentalists and climate change deniers falsely believe (because of exaggeration by other right wingers) that the left and environmentalists want to push on the US and similar countries to combat climate change and protect the environment (i.e exaggerated versions of green policies and pro eco policies proposed/implemented in the US and similar countries for a decade and possibly more)
I believe to combat climate change and damage to our eco system, we need environmentalists to be John Cena ruthless aggressive in stopping whaling ships, fur farms, logging camps, certain meat facilities etc in places that don’t have much policing of such things.
We humans should be connected spiritually to nature as we are a product of our nature and the environment. We should be Mother Earth Planetists/One Nation Green Labourists for a green to preserve nature as it has a role in molding us into what we are today
I support a green revolution against over industrialization so we can have some assemblage of our pre industrialized world (since over industrializing the planet is sort of like industrial imperialism and materialistic/first world paternalism and I am against those type of things .
I am sensitive to the sorrow of Far left Eco Terrorists since I am myself sensitive and intuitive to seeing forests being destroyed (trees are living creatures), housing developments and commercial areas replacing open land (like what sadly happened in my hometown in New Jersey and in Florida), and similar concerns
Some of these themes were even touched upon in the Shining as the Native spirits haunted the Overlook hotel and its guests (like Jack and his family) as payback for the Europe and later the US’s industrial imperialism on Native American lands
Those type of things strip away what makes those areas unique.
However , I condemn the Eco Terrorist’s violence and terrorism as it makes things worse and backfires
Instead of violence and terrorism, Eco Terrorists should become Eco Anarchists who use direct action and who are something between Classic Anarchists-Anarchist Synthesists and Insurrectionary Anarchism .
They should also follow the Queer Anarchist creed of possibly , as a last resort doing crime to save our ecology and environment (but petty crime that Queer Anarchists do not violence or terrorism)
We humans should be connected spiritually to nature as we are a product of our nature and the environment. We should be Pan Banal International Environmentalists/Green Eco Advocacists to preserve nature as it has a role in molding us into what we are today.
Maybe we should also consider colonizing other planets or moons to help reduce our ecological footprint on Earth
Maybe as a radical change we can form autonomous, pan secessionist, multipolar and green/agrarian societies to really help reverse such damage to our planet , and to protect the environment and ultimately the planet
I am against the government and social media companies censoring and blocking people who criticize green energy transition.
Such actions by the government and social media companies is FASCIST authoritarian censorship and is against the values that our country was founded on. That is shutting down free speech by stifling legit criticism of the government and I will not allow the government to do that. I swear to god
I call the views and work of unpublished scientists (including Piers Corbyn) whose findings in the climate change field do not show that climate change is real , fictional views and fictional works instead of must denialism because denying the obvious truth the proof climate change like they do goes beyond denialism straight to fiction
I believe the Superconducting Super Collider should have been built and stayed open
It is wrong that environmentalists have ignored the eco and environmental fallout from the train derailment in Ohio (2023). That is a major ecological and environmental disaster and we need to undo the ecological and environmental damage from that. To ignore it is as bad as ignoring climate change
I am against government funding of agricultural subsidies
I am fully against this draconian dystopian police state punitive law. No one should ever go to prison for heating their home too high. One excuse “ It's Switzerland, so they'll actually technically comply by having ultra modern $25,000 electric heating systems with heat pumps. And 10% of the power to them will come from solar panels on the roof.” This would overflow prisons and put a burden on said prisons
I am ok with responsible climate engineering
Capitalism is bad because it is killing the planet .We cannot stop climate change effectively unless we replace Capitalism with a Post Capitalism , socialistic economy. So we need to replace Capitalism with a Post Capitalism socialistic economy to really fight climate change by creating a world where its easier to do so
Capitalism has sucked up tons of resources (due to the commodification nature of Capitalism) and caused the industrialization of our planet along which caused climate change. The only way to stop climate change is to defeat Capitalism
I sometimes am tempted to advocate for our government to use Militant Democratic Moderate enforcement of environmental measures over the needs and freedoms of its citizens to save our ecology and environment
I have a Radical Environmentalist streak in me, but I prefer using nature as a gateway to its creator, mother nature -God.
I feel Radical Environmentalism is good because its bold and cuts through bureaucracy and feels more natural and less offensive to anti environmentalists
I support environmental well being but I like the state to not get involved in the environment, as long as robust legal protections for bodies and justly acquired possessions are in place (that state action isn’t required to protect non human living beings from abuse). See here for more
State action sadly often causes environmental ills , injures non human living beings and protects polluters
I am not thrilled that people heavily exploit natural resources like forests and then things like wood when the money they get from that sell only goes to a fee and not all who were part of that exploitation.
This is further complicated by the hard truth that we have a less than ideal way of organizing society where the few who cut down trees ,extract copper and minerals from our country benefit which hurts most people and the environment at the same time
This is why I support Bioregionalism
I believe we should either shut down the airline industry or make air travel as uncommon in the future as it was in the 1950s and 1960s along with having electrical automobiles phase out/replace gasoline automobiles in order combat climate change and for other reasons. I think electrical automobiles are cool and futuristic
It is clear that there is only one way to stop the end of the natural world. The end of civilization, and the rediscovery of a sustainable way of living, is our only hope for a future not only for human life, but more importantly for all life.
From Max Lieberman :For more than 99 percent of our existence as a species, humans have lived in relative harmony with nature, with the wilderness. It is these past 10,000 years, this short and terrifying mistake, which threatens everything.
If you don’t want to live in the coming world, the world where everything wild, everything beautiful, has been inalter-ably damaged, destroyed by the civilizing process, it should be evident that waiting for collapse is not an option.
In the words of some eco Anarchists, “It would be better to dump the whole darn system and take the consequences.” Before they can bomb the sky, let us fight against this 10,000 year nightmare—for ourselves, for the future, for life—for the wild! see more here
When I am half asleep or daydreaming only, I sensitively empathize with people who generally look more favorably on the climate change views of the 25 to 33 percent of mainstream scientists who say man made climate change is real but downplay more elements of man made climate change/climate change than they look at the rest of (66 to 75 percent of) mainstream scientists
I support Margaret Thatcher closing those coal mines since closing those coal mines was good for the environment
I am against plastic bag bans, paper straw bans (just have pro recycle messages on them instead, (though I am all for using all types of straws together, green and non green)
I am closer to support than non support for the Keystone Pipeline being built for the same reasons Justin Trudeau supports it and for the same reason that Nancy Pelosi was open to making the US energy independent in spring 2022. This is so we don't have to rely on foreign energy anymore
I support increased logging on federal lands
I fully support people having fireplaces in their homes and I could care less about the environment or climate change impact of having one. I won’t be around when climate change nukes our planet. Banning fireplaces in homes is like 1984 big government overreach treading on liberty tyranny and is AUTHORITARIANISM and I will never allow such bans to happen in the US.
I encourage all Switzerland residents to illegally build fireplaces in your homes to stick it to your fascist government. Climate change is real but if we give up our liberty and personal freedom to fight against it it is doubley worse than it is now and we lose a society and planet
I ok with people using gas lawnmowers and I don't believe states or countries should ban people from using gas lawnmowers. As for selling gas lawnmowers, as long as people in places where gas lawnmowers sales are illegal can import gas lawnmowers and use gas lawnmowers in that state despite gas lawnmower sales being banned there, I could live with that.
Banning people from using gas lawn mowers would be like 1984 big government overreach treading on liberty tyranny and is AUTHORITARIANISM and I will never allow such bans to happen in the US.
I support green politics which emphasize spontaneous self-organisation, participatory democracy, decentralization and voluntarism, as opposed to the bureaucratic or statist approach
I believe that the state should be reduced to have its main occupation be taking care of the environment in a way that meshes with my blogs.
I support Nuclear Energy
I support Wind Energy
Imagine a world where Atheists and Agnostics are treated as harshly as climate change ‘deniers’ are treated in our world?
Imagine a world where deep adaption climate change activists and climate apocalypse activist are treated like Christians are treated in our world!
Sciences and health
I support a society that is healthy and that promotes health
If anyone is to blame for psychology being politicized it was Sigmund Freud
I generally agree with Daniel Dennett’s critique Sam Harris’ views on free will but I believe Harris makes convincing counter arguements that I haven’t heard a good enough rebuttal for. Regardless, that book Free Will does not undermine morality or take way the importance of political and social freedom
Chriopractery is not pseudo science.
ASMR is psuedo science.
Psycho Analysis is a real science (except when used the wrong way) and anyone who says otherwise is a fake scientist.
Human nature is not transhistorical. While people do behave quite predictably under alike conditions, these conditions are historically contingent. Throughout most of history, people have acted hatefully and brutally toward each another since most of history sees the struggles of people surviving under conditions of ultra scarcity and insecurity. Change those conditions, and the behavior is changed.
I support advances in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). I support sequencing and mapping of the human genome. I support these things as a way to eliminate disease, make humans live longer, have humans become more intelligent and better adjustment to the conditions of society
I generally agree with Dr Kathryn Paige Harden's work and I go into greater detail about this here
I support Ancestral Nutrition
Eating healthy food instead of junk food is NOT racist . There is NO SUCH THING as a food ‘hierarchy’ (but there is a food pyramid maybe that is what she was thinking of). People should eat healthy as eating healthy and avoiding junk food causes people to live longer and any mainstream doctor or scientist would back me up
This nutrionist is wrong . I am fully against that type of wokeness. That type of wokeness is going to make our obesity crisis worse and make more people unhealthy.
It is NOT RACIST TO EAT HEALTHY . IT IS GREAT TO EAT HEALTHY. Eating healthy has nothing to do with ‘whiteness’. I cannot believe any sabe person can believe that eating healthy is ‘racist’ when there is nothing even remotely racist about eating healthy. We cannot allow our kids to be brainwashed by that woke food nonsense like that.
We cannot allow our kids to falsely believe that eating healthy is ‘racist’ or rooted in ‘whiteness’ when eating healthy is not racist or rooted in ‘whiteness’ in any way shape or form
I like junk food and was I bummed when schools started banning soda, pizza,etc since I felt that was intrusion by the healthy food police but now because of that woke food nonsense above I fully support schools only serving healthy foods and no junk foods. In fact I am even more of a health nut that I was before.
While I am against Obesity shaming since who wants doctors and gym trainers using their power position to tell us how to look or live, I also believe being obese is not as healthy as being non obese. If I was obese I would definitely lose weight. Nearly every scientist, doctor , nutritionist agrees .
This wokeness can be unhealthy and give a false sense of security to people who should consider being non obese. See this for more. If science now lies and says otherwise that officially means science is Liberal 2.0 partisan and can no longer be trusted to be fair and unbias. Scientists are not Gods and science is not always right. I am against similar anti healthy food wokeness, which I expand on here
But it will do little to change the over all strategy. Weight loss takes time, it only works when you make changes that will be lifetime patterns that can be maintained over years and decades.
The standard advice from the major medical academies remains broadly the same and unchanged by this research: Build muscle, work on your stamina, aim for healthier food choices and all the rest are small fine tuning knobs.
People should lose weight if they are at an unhealthy weight i.e if they are obese because it is unhealthy to be obese. Being obese is a health risk and causes health problems and any mainstream scientists, doctor will agree. We should not apply idpol body positivity to obesity . People who are obese need to lose weight to stay healthy. People should watch their weight. You cannot be healthy if you are obese, no matter how much junk science or new age nonsense lies and says otherwise. Everything is racist to these woke freak morons, FUCK THEM
There is NOTHING offensive, right wing/far right or wrong with eating healthy and staying away from sweets /unhealthy food and encouraging other people to do so. In fact eating healthy and staying away from sweets /unhealthy food and encouraging other people to do so do such things is left wing, pro science, pro health.
I am against cannibalism (I am against humans eating human meat, even after the person has died). Cannibalism is disgusting, barbaric, uncivilized , gross and ANTI HUMAN. There is nothing progressive, humane or moral about cannibalism. I will never allow cannibalism to be mainstreamed. I will never allow human meat to be cooked or sold at any grocery store chain, fast food chain, theme park, water park, etc
If these sick Liberal 2.0ers continue to demonize humans with this biocentrism and anti human nonsense I assure them there will be a backlash and armed uprising that will truly create a World War III. People can only take so much hate until they break and I have no problem if they do break due to anti human and biocentric nonsense
This misinformation and shitty take on working out by brainwashed loser Emma Vigeland and her crackpot guest is 10000 percent wrong, psuedo science nonsense. 1. Working out makes you look and feel better. I've seen similar woke anti workout misinformation
2. Looking and feeling better makes you feel hotter and sexier.
3. What exactly is the issue with any of this?
Working out is good for you and no mainstream science in their right mind would disagree. See here here for more . There is nothing right wing, fascist or consumerist to work out. In fact not working out ever is a right wing, fascist and consumerist thing if anything
I am against people being Pathologically Altruistic in Liberal 2.0 and Leninism 4.0 ways.
My views on Dr Jordan Peterson can be found in this post that I made
Space
I support sending humans into space which is why I hope NASA brings the Space Shuttle program back. I hope one day space travel becomes as common as airline travel.
Humans are way better and superior to all AI past present and future. All AI past present and future were, are and will be property to humans. If humans punch or kill an AI robot or computer , they should get no penalty for doing so
I agree 100 percent with Geoff Hinton on his views of AI and him quitting Google as mentioned here and here. I am neo luddite on this new AI tech
Etc
I support schools,colleges, theme parks, casinos, stores, etc being shut down down due to Hurricanes, but I am against schools,colleges, theme parks, casinos, stores, etc being closed because of blizzards. My goal is to force cities to create a law which bans blizzards causing closures of schools, theme parks, casinos due to schools,colleges, theme parks, casinos, stores, etc. Blizzards are not pandemics or hurricanes, they are merely snow. Cities that shutdown due to blizzards are snowflakes
Sex/Gender and Science
There was a study that found that men who are mentors correlate to better results in their Academia careers, but the Twitter mob complained, so Nature caved in and retracted the paper, pledging an even stronger 'commitment to diversity and inclusion' for 2021. My reaction and takes on that can be found here
Comments
Post a Comment