http://disqus.com/by/mynym/enThu, 19 Sep 2013 16:34:57 -0000http://www.infowars.com/matt-drudge-and-alex-jones-17-year-old-bloggers/#comment-1052045244<p>There is no "secret" conspiracy. It's open that there are dual citizens in Congress or running "homeland" security like Chertoff did or serving as a chief of staff like Rahm Immanuel did, etc. Look up Anthony Lawson and Ry Dawson on Youtube, they deal with how powerful Jewish factions can emerge sometimes. Not that other Globalist Inc. factions seeking power are saints. But there's no use turning a blind eye to those in the mix that mix a tribal, Talmudic or "above the law" mentality into it due to religious beliefs too. "Above the law" = criminal. Tribal mentality = gang or gangster. And that's the mentality that some factions and Jewish lobbying groups reflect, even among people that aren't "Jewish." E.g. Patrick Clawson almost openly proposing false flags at an AIPAC conference or PNAC working with Cheney on a "New Pearl Harbor," etc. You don't have to be Jewish to have an "above the law" or gangster mentality. But it probably doesn't help if religious beliefs about human sacrifices/holocausts giving tribe members the ability to transcend the rule of law and so forth can easily be mixed in. Not that most gang members even think about why their gangs/tribes exist. It's a mentality, not a race. (And interpretations of "religions" vary depending on the faction...)</p>mynymThu, 19 Sep 2013 16:34:57 -0000http://www.jasonshen.com/post/32965962#comment-385365<p><i>...the improbability of life (or as he calls it mud) leading to humanity - that it’s easy for people fall prey to common-sensical and at-first-glance convincing theories of intelligent design.</i></p><p>You seem to be projecting a valid criticism of how you are blurring things together onto Stein. The notion that Life emerged from mud is fairly clear, we generally know what mud is and what Life is. In contrast, it's not clear what you're saying because Stein didn't call Life mud as you apparently believe he did as his main point is the vast distinction between mud and Life rooted in the tight specifications of form as specified in complex forms of information necessary for even very simple forms of Life.</p><p><i>However, many of our instinctual ideas about other things are also wrong - earth revolves around the sun....</i></p><p>Many instinctual ideas are correct, the moon revolves around the earth... it is very important to do away with instinctual ideas based on falsifiable theories that can be verified based on strong empirical evidence. One certainly shouldn't cite the fact that a bit of knowledge is instinctual as if that is evidence that it is incorrect.</p><p><i>....humans are 99.9% the same as chimpanzees....</i></p><p>No they aren't.</p><p><i>All these theories have been tested time and time again and shown to be correct. Like evolution.</i></p><p>If that's like whatever you think the hypothetical goo typical to evolution is, then evolution has not been shown to be correct. Given that the notion of evolution is often rooted in hypothetical goo which comports itself to any set of empirical observations it seems to be unfalsifiable. For instance, what type of empirical observations would falsify "evolution"?</p>mynymSun, 27 Apr 2008 12:24:59 -0000