It’s fascinating to see that while historians have completely disproven the old Black Legend about the Spanish Inquisition and corrected the number of people prosecuted and executed by several orders of magnitude, Clown World is still trying to present what was a very minor and non-noteworthy exercise in successfully maintaining the social order into one of the worst historical iniquities in human history.
Beyond its endless sunshine and sandy beaches, Spain has a dark history that has stained the nation to this day. For hundreds of years, people were burned at the stake, stretched to death, or otherwise tortured for the sole reason that they were not Catholic.
The Spanish Inquisition is considered to be one of the most shameful and grotesque periods in Roman Catholic history. According to some modern estimates, around 150,000 people were prosecuted for various offences during the three-century duration of the reign of terror, of whom between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed after enduring some of the most spine chilling acts of torture imaginable.
Extensive archival material contains accounts of torture victims’ cries and descriptions of funeral pyres, atrocities which continue to horrify historians to this day. The horrors of the Inquisition are among some of the most sadistic acts of terror in history, which extended into every area of Spanish society and almost every corner of its global empire.
This is total historical nonsense. Even if we assume the very worst of it, the Spanish Inquisition was less lethal than children’s bicycles are today. The Inquisition prosecuted 421 people per year for the crime of pretending to be something they were not in order to feign loyalty to the Spanish crown; just last year, the British crown prosecuted 419,000 people in England and Wales alone, many of them for simply expressing their opinion about the migrant invasion of their country.
Modern Britain is more than three orders of magnitude worse than the Spanish Inquisition, and that was prior to the establishment of the Keir Starmer regime. This is an indisputable historical fact.
And as for those 3,000 to 5,000 executions over a period of 356 years, during the 38-year reign of the King of England, Henry VIII, as many as 72,000 people are estimated to have been executed.
We’re all supposed to be VERY OUTRAGED that the evil Russians would sentence a nice American ballerina who never did nothing to 12 YEARS IN PRISON for one tiny little act of treason.
The Russian-American ballerina accused of committing treason by donating $51.80 to Ukraine’s military has been sentenced to 12 years in prison. Ksenia Karelina was found guilty of ‘high treason’ by a Russian court on Thursday and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment in a general regime colony.
Karelina, who reportedly obtained US citizenship after marrying an American and moving to Los Angeles, was arrested in Yekaterinburg in February. She had returned to Russia to visit her family. It is understood that when she arrived at Koltsovo airport in late January her cell phone was checked using the search word ‘Ukraine’. Law enforcement allegedly found evidence of a bank transfer to a pro-Ukrainian foundation in America.
She was later detained and charged with treason. Karelina pleaded guilty in her closed trial last week, news reports said.
Your first clue something is amiss in the coverage: she’s an “American” named Ksenia. In truth, she’s a Russian national who donated money to the military of a country that is not only at war with Russia, but just literally invaded Russia. That’s about a clear-cut case of treason as you can get, even if the amount of money is small.
Meanwhile, the UK is arresting thousands of His Majesty’s subjects and rapidly sentencing them to prison for the “crime” of protesting the foreign invasion of their country. So while Russia punishes traitors, the UK punishes those who are not traitors.
I doubt they’re going to successfully stoke any anti-Russian outrage in the USA or the UK with this little sally, if the comments at the UK newspaper site are any guide. The best rhetoric points to the truth, it is not shamelessly hypocritical.
3000 people have been sent to prison in the UK for what they have wrote on social media. 200 in Russia.
Its already here, prison for reposting tweets, memes, FB comments etc that are critical of Starmers Junta.
The UK has the same type of justice. Say anything the authorities don’t like and off to jail with you.
After a long hiatus, there were some excellent memes. I think this was the highest average ratings I’ve ever given out in a meme review. Not only are people beginning to demonstrate a grasp of the art of visual rhetoric, but they’re starting to utilize the AI systems to produce more attractive and more specific art. That being said, the clear-cut winner was about as artistically simple as a meme can be. It’s a meme that is brutally powerful, and capable of cutting cleanly through decades of relentless propaganda. 10/10
There were two other tens, which you can see if you watch the meme review on UATV. But this one has to be shown here given its timely and amusing relevance, in which Dragonball Z encounters an unbelievably high creepiness level. In fact, this meme has the honor of being the first post in the brand new Homage to the Master subreddit, r/neilgaimanmemes. We’ll probably need three moderators in the Europe, US, and Asian time zones since it’s open to the public and I won’t have time for riding herd on the inevitable SJW infestation, so if you’re interested, let me know on SG as well as which time zone you’re in. An ability to produce memes of your own is a plus, but not a necessity. You will, however, have to create a Reddit account. VFM, this one’s optional, but encouraged, particularly for those who are skilled in the dark arts of visual rhetoric.
We’re bringing back the Weekly Meme Review tonight. You know the drill. Limit: one meme per customer. Put MEME in the subject. This is my submission, courtesy of a commenter at Sigma Game, who coined the phrase quoted therein. It’s as flawless a piece of rhetoric as I’ve ever seen.
An eminent authority on mathematics, namely, Frank J. Tipler, recommends that we keep things a bit more simple and rhetorical for the innumerate enthusiasts of evolution by natural selection:
You are of course quite correct that biologists do not understand the mathematical criticisms of evolution by natural selection. Since they are incapable of being reached by dialectic, perhaps rhetoric would be more effective.
One rhetorical technique is Argument From Authority.
In your July 13, 2024 “Evolutionists are Retarded,” you refer to the mathematical arguments given in the 1966 conference by “a professor of electrical engineering from MIT and a French mathematician.” In one of your earlier posts on this subject, you mentioned the similar criticisms by the mathematician S. Ulam, but you did not say who Stanislaw Ulam was.
Ulam was the co-discoverer of the Teller-Ulam design for the thermonuclear bomb. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Teller–Ulam_design). Ulam also discovered the Monte Carlo Method (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Carlo_method) which was essential to working out the details of the H-bomb’s mechanism. Now the Monte Carlo Method is an evolution by natural selection technique that actually works!
An example of the Monte Carlo Method is Richard Dawkins’ “Methinks it is a weasel” so-called “example” of Darwinian evolution (it’s not). In the “Methinks” example, the endpoint is chosen ahead of time (this is teleology, which is implied by determinism — recall that Monte Carlo has a “deterministic” piece in the algorithm). Certainly, if there is a future goal chosen, natural selection can find it. The Monte Carlo Method works! But the key point of Darwinism is that evolution is assumed to have no goal.
Which means that Darwinism doesn’t work mathematically, for the reasons you’ve stated. Which was Ulam’s point. And Ulam understood the mathematics — he ought to, he invented it — and the biologists did not, and have not, and cannot.
So, if these people cannot be reached by dialectic, they might be reached by rhetoric: Ulam was a great mathematician who understood the mathematics of evolution.
Argument from Authority does not establish truth, but it does establish presumption of truth: if you cannot understand the mathematics, assume that the mathematicians do.
So there it is. Evolutionary biologists don’t understand the mathematics of evolution. And you don’t have to take the word of a humble truck driver and part-time plumber for it either, that’s on the authority of a very well-respected professor of mathematics as well as a famous mathematician of historical note.
The man can certainly turn a phrase. This one is definitely going in the aphorism book:
If you cannot understand the mathematics, assume that the mathematicians do. –Frank J. Tipler, Professor of Mathematics, Tulane University
That French mathematician I mentioned in the previous post was no slouch either. One thing that has become very clear is that the educated critics of TENS are vastly smarter, on average, than its best-known and most-educated advocates.
When the parties change but the policies remain the same, what you have is neither a democracy nor a republic. It’s just democracy theater, or as they say in France, le théâtre de la démocratie factice.
Today it is impossible to imagine any of the ultra-left repeating the words of Georges Marchais, the leader of the French Communist Party, in 1980: “It is necessary to stop both illegal and legal immigration. It is totally unacceptable to allow more and more migrant workers into France when our country already has 2 million unemployed French people and immigrants who have already settled here.”
Today, the number of unemployed has reached almost 5.5 million, the amount of legal and illegal immigrants has increased tenfold, but the left does not see this as a problem and devotes itself primarily to fighting ‘all discrimination’. The Socialists seriously discredited themselves during the government of François Hollande, who positioned himself as ‘the enemy of international finance’ but did very little to protect the poor, presenting the ‘marriage equality’ law as his main achievement…
Opponents can be as radical as they like in words, but when it comes to action they are unable to offer a real alternative to the policies of their predecessors. This can be seen in other European countries where ‘extremists’ have been in power. The French far-right and far-left have toned down their criticism of Brussels and, if they come to power, a relatively smooth integration into pan-European structures is more likely than an attempt by Paris at radical reform (as the representatives of the National Rally and the leaders of France Unbowed recently insisted). The statements and actions of the opposition may be vibrant and demonstrative, they may cause riots and protests, they may lead to internal chaos. But they are unlikely to be able to break the general development trend.
The economist Frederick Farah has pointed out that “over the past few decades, we have seen that whatever majority is in power, it implements roughly the same policies, leading to the deterioration of working conditions and stable employment, the dismantling of public services, increased poverty, the reduction of the country’s industrial base, strategic vulnerability and the rise of populism.”
This is why the sovereign nations are finally winning the rhetorical battle against Clown World and its fake democracies, false freedoms, and inverted rights. Seventy years of empty promises and false assurances have not brought about the shiny, sexy, seculartopia of the future that convinced the people of Christendom to abandon their traditions, their faith, and their cultures, but have instead delivered invasion, poverty, depravity, and soon, military defeat.
Forbes has been met with fierce criticism over a recent opinion piece about two Bridgerton characters being in a ‘mixed-weight romance’ – suggesting that the world is ‘still not ready’ to see two people of different body types dating on-screen.
The piece, which was written by Virgie Tovar, a ‘leading expert on weight bias’, focused on the relationship between fictional characters Penelope Featherington, played by Nicola Coughlan, and Colin Bridgerton, played by Luke Newton. Tovar said that the on-screen relationship between the two characters ‘defied romance plotline convention’, seemingly because Nicola is ‘larger’ than Luke.
But Tovar’s use of the phrase ‘mixed-weight romance’ has sparked a bitter backlash from readers, with many questioning why the need to call attention to their size was ever necessary. Fans of the Shonda Rhimes series took to X, formerly known as Twitter, in their droves to slam the writer and the publication, furiously mocking the use of the ‘mixed-weight’ phrasing.
Savage. Absolutely and beautifully savage. And really, what’s wrong with a mixed-weight relationship? You aren’t some kind of hateful fattist or something, are you?
You know a term is rhetorically effective when its mere existence triggers the susceptible.
If you really want to eviscerate a man, compliment him on his open-mindedness…
This is a quote from the 1966 Philadelphia symposium, but it is precisely the same sort of argument that any substantive critic of Neo-Darwinism keeps running into from the Neo-Darwinians:
Combinations of different genes occur such that every individual is a unique combination, and the selective assay of the value of each random mutation is performed simultaneously in this framework for thousands of mutations at a time. The acceptance of the neo-Darwinian concept of evolution appears to be eminently valid on this basis. However, a critical feature is the occurrence of mechanisms for genetic combination and recombination, and a major criticism of the neo-Darwinian concept which has been raised at this meeting is premised on the lack of such a mechanism in the initial steps of the evolution of a “sense” sequence of a polypeptide or polynucleotide from an initially “nonsense” sequence. It does not, however, seem an extreme extrapolation from the known facts of nucleic acid replication and transcription to envisage that combination and recombination are inherent features of polynucleotides, and the evolution of “sense” sequences then becomes a process of reasonable probability. – Dr. Alex Fraser, Professor of Genetics, University of California Davis, California
Let’s break the argument down into its component parts:
There is no mechanism. This is readily admitted.
This lack of a mechanism renders the hypothesis impossible.
But it doesn’t strike the Neo-Darwinian true believer to be an extreme extrapolation to imagine what this nonexistent, never-observed mechanism could be if it existed, which it doesn’t.
And if we simply imagine that this nonexistent mechanism existed, then the proposed process that requires it in order to function becomes theoretically possible.
Therefore, the process works as imagined
What sort of philosophical ineptitude and logical retardery is this? Who is stupid enough to accept this as a legitimate argument, let alone an established fact? This isn’t science, reason, logic, or math, it’s just maleducated handwaving combined with wishful thinking. They’re playing poker with Uno cards.
Evolution isn’t science. It isn’t even philosophy or religion. It’s just the vacuous rhetoric of the innumerate, as even its leading champions were forced to admit at the end of the 1966 symposium.
I hope the biologists have shown the physicists that evolutionary theories are not totally vacuous. I think the physicists have shown us that they are certainly as yet very incomplete, and I think we are ready to realize they are very incomplete. – Dr. C. H. Waddington, Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Monday called for the “total annihilation” of Rafah and other cities in the Gaza Strip.
“There are no half measures. Rafah, Deir al-Balah, Nuseirat – total annihilation. ‘You will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven’ – there’s no place under heaven,” Smotrich said.
Smotrich’s reference to “Amalek” was from a line in Deuteronomy, a book in the Hebrew Bible. Amalek is a nation the ancient Israelites were commanded to destroy, and in the book of Samuel, the Israelites were told to “slay both man and woman, infant and suckling.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has previously compared Gaza to Amalek, which has been cited as evidence of genocidal rhetoric in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.
I’m not sure that “Putting the NAZI in Ashkenazi” is a particularly great campaign program, but then, I don’t know much about Israeli politics these days. Hitler’s rhetoric went over fairly well in his time, after all.
However, I think it’s bizarre to see conservatives, Boomers, and conservative Boomers to be complaining that American college students are protesting against the genocidal actions of the Israeli government when the IDF is literally killing tens of thousands of Palestinians while top Israeli government officials are openly calling for a literal genocide of an entire people.
The Gazacaust isn’t going to be forgotten any faster than the Holocaust was, so Israelis had better get used to the idea of paying reparations to the Palestinians and their descendants for at least another 70 years.
I’ve been visited 4 times in 3 days by Cheshire Police. Asking for a Voluntary interview about something I’ve tweeted. Including a couple of women police officers knocking at 9.30pm last night when my kids were in bed. I’ve given them my solicitors information and number. He then called to arrange an interview. No answer, so he left a voice message for the Sergeant who’d visited on the 1st occasion. The last two women didn’t know there had been 3 visits in 3 days, apparently! Either it’s a shambles or an attempt to intimidate me and my family. Welcome to North Korea.
Remember, hypocrisy is always a virtue in the inversion that is Clown World. The servants of Clown World genuinely believe they are upholding freedom as they oppress you, believe they are defending basic human rights as they threaten violent force to silence speech, and believe they are defending people while they murder innocent civilians.
And the more trivial the thought crime, the more popular the opinion expressed, the more overt the attempts to intimidate.
But don’t think that they’ll be mustered in your defense when you are openly slandered, libeled, defamed, and insulted, even when you have an iron-clad case against those who have clearly violated the law more egregiously than the thought criminals they are pursuing. Then, it’s suddenly “well, no actual harm done” and “freedom of speech” and “freedom of the press” and every other subjective excuse they think will somehow conceal the obvious fact of their shameless hypocrisy and double standard.
Which is why it is best, if you are at all active on social media or even a minor public figure, to stick relentlessly to telling the truth, using rhetoric that is soundly based in proper dialectic, and preferably, utilizes terms that are defined as positive by the Clown Worlders themselves. This doesn’t mean that they won’t try to prosecute you for directly quoting someone stating an uncomfortable truth, but it does significantly complicate their ability to do so successfully.
Rolling Stone journalist Amanda Robb once complained in an article that she interviewed me for three hours without me ever giving her anything “useful”. What she was looking for was a kill-quote and I knew it. Her problem was that I expressed my opinions very clearly, without hiding anything, but in an entirely non-pejorative manner, with no vulgarities, obscenities, or emotionally-charged terms that have been defined as offensive. Of course, her confession confirming her intentions is why I no longer give interviews to anyone with any associations with the mainstream media.
That’s why, 11 years later, they’re still using the same half-sentence quote taken completely out of context to try to discredit and deplatform me. They just don’t have anything else; they have to invent totally false positions I’ve never, ever, held or expressed just to take a shot even though there are 27,000 blog posts, 512 columns, and 15 books to comb through if they need material. Here is the entire quote, which you will note never appears in its entirety on Wikipedia or anywhere else beside this blog, because it shows that I was not only responding to an series of outrageous lies and accusations made, completely unprovoked, by Jemisin, but that my response to her absurd and dishonest “call for reconciliation” in Australia was not only reasonable, but prescient.
Jemisin has it wrong; it is not that I, and others, do not view her as human, (although genetic science presently suggests that we are not equally homo sapiens sapiens), it is that we simply do not view her as being fully civilized for the obvious historical reason that she is not.
She is lying about the laws in Texas and Florida too. The laws are not there to let whites ” just shoot people like me, without consequence, as long as they feel threatened by my presence”, those self-defense laws have been put in place to let whites defend their lives and their property from people, like her, who are half-savages engaged in attacking them.
Being an educated, but ignorant half-savage, with little more understanding of what it took to build a new literature by “a bunch of beardy old middle-class middle-American guys” than an illiterate Igbotu tribesman has of how to build a jet engine, Jemisin clearly does not understand that her dishonest call for “reconciliation” and even more diversity within SF/F is tantamount to a call for its decline into irrelevance. Nor do the back-patting Samuel Johnsons wiping their eyes and congratulating her for her ever-so-touching speech understand that.
There can be no reconciliation between the observant and the delusional.
I have never retracted, apologized, or backed down from what I said, why it’s still all right there on the blog for everyone to see, and why they had to give her no less than three successive Best Novel Hugo Awards in order to elevate her imaginary standing in the science fiction world to distract attention from the observable truth about one of their leading poster diversities.
Eleven years later, events have proven my assessment was absolutely correct. Thanks to the convergence of the various industries involved, Jemisin got the “even more diversity within SF/F” for which she was calling and SF/F is now observably in marked decline in every single format, from comics to film. And it never ceases to be amusing how the midwits in the media showed themselves to be incapable of understanding the science in the genetic science reference, although word must have eventually gotten around because they all suddenly dropped that one about six years ago.
In any event, never give them the ammo with which to shoot you. Force them to manufacture it without ever stepping back one inch from that which is true and True. For we will continue to observe while they continue to delude themselves, and there will never be any reconciliation until the day Reality comes for them and shatters their delusions.
Oi! We ‘eard you been thinking some criminal thoughts!
