Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Pinkiebee

  1. Just now, jedidiah said:


    May I just say ‘ Bollocks’.

    You can. I'm good with all feedback loops positive or negative. a five word critique may have been more useful. But you are possibly in a hurry

  2. 1 minute ago, jedidiah said:


    I agree with you up to your last paragraph.


    The internet is more used for inane social media by vacuous, fatuous, obtuse zombies; those using it to educate themselves are in this case the few.

    Well no. The " woke revolution" that everyone here seems to rally against is being conducted and controled by a small number of influencers on the internet. Mostly Twitter.  


    It's the most powerful of tools. They are just better and smarter at using it

  3. 3 minutes ago, jedidiah said:


    It does seem futile; depends who your current guru is I suppose.


    I don’t really give a shit anymore; this place is a sick joke, so I’ll just ramble on til I don’t; all good.


    I don’t require anything of anyone; when the zombies are dragging those of us down who don’t want to be dragged down, that’s when I get/got a tad irate.


    i don’t know where you got your last paragraph from; and it’s pretty simplistic anyway; I’m pretty sure you know what I meant; I should say you’ve been around these boards a few times.

    People are being so judgemental of the bulk of the population for not ascribing to a world view similar to theirs.


    There not fools or sheeple or futile or any other pejorativeterm you want to throw at them.


    They are  just rats in a maze like you. Only the dead go free

  4. I 5think people are clutching at straws 


    In all of human history there has seldom been a revolution were the many have overthrown the few. Mostly as the many cant organise it.  Sure they can organise a mob or a riot. They can kill people or burn things down. But when the anger goes so does the uprising and if they managed to kill the few another ruling class appears to take over.


    Revolutions that could be viewed as successful have always been lead by the intellectuals.  Who can organise it. But then you get a new ruling class of intellectuals.  Who generaly seem to be worse than what came before.


    Slow social change on the mantra of " educate, agitate organise seem to work best. That's why they want to shut the internet down. 

  5. 36 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:


    The thing is that astronomers and scientists have been beaming out transmissions into space for decades, as well as launching probes such as the Voyagers.


    I remember reading years ago about how even TV and radio broadcasts 'leak out' beyond our atmosphere and into space.


    If an alien civilisation within travelling distance picks up Gogglebox, The Masked Singer or I'm A Celebrity, they've probably already decided we're not worth bothering with.

    Apparently the radio waves from our own communication will just be a fog of noise. So they are not watching east enders with out a licence. It has by now manged to reach a distance of about a 100 light years.  Strangely enough.  But would almost certainly be recognised as not natural even if they have no idea what we are watching or where its comming from


    The actual attempts at communication are very directional. We pick a constellation and blast a message at it on a frequency that's a dip in the frequency of hydrogen. 


    Again almost untranslatabe but the very fact it's on the frequency it is. Should tell them it's not natural . The idea that they blast back on the same frequency. Which hasnt happened as yet


    Of course if it's the wrong constellation.  Or they are not monitoring an obscure frequency . Have already given up radio technology.  They wont get it. 


    Pulsed lasers seems to be the direction of travel 

  6. Just now, Human10 said:

    If they were so advanced chances are they would help to get rid of Earth vermin to protect Universe from them in the future...


    That seems unlikely to be honest.  I was speaking of being technically advanced rather that culturally or spiritually advanced.


    I'd guess that they had advanced for much the same reason we had and thus their morals and leadership were no better 

  7. 5 minutes ago, skitzorat said:

    Who gets to judge what is "too much" tolerance? No one gets a vote on it.

    And what poor down trodden victim doesn't get "enough" tolerance? in your opinion.


    "Tolerance" is the problem, especially when mixed with an apathetic, dumbed down, fluoridated, castrated society.


    The Marxist's of the 60s in America (ex Frankfurt School) were all about breaking down social norms which they thought of as "pathological" - think "The Authoritarian Personality"

    Herbert Marcuse  and his subversive ilk fled Nazi Germany to the United States. They lived in California which at the time was literally heaven on Earth and they sat indoors, in suits, in their beachside home and plotted and schemed on how they could destroy it.


    And here we are today.

    He had a few things to say about "tolerance" and "tolerating the intolerable"




    Marcuse argues that "the realization of the objective of tolerance" requires "intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed." He makes the case for "liberating tolerance", which would consist of intolerance to right-wing movements and toleration of left-wing movements.[5]




    If I had to sum it up in a short phrase 


    I'd say society fails to be tolerant of other peoples intolerances 

    That then becomes an attack on free speech.  Which has never actually existed in the UK anyway.  But what speech is free has change generation by generation


    Which victims are lacking in received tolerance.  Poor  /working class white males for one

  8. On 4/14/2022 at 10:54 PM, jedidiah said:

    Another video out with Icke titled the above.


    While in theory this is true, nothing will ever come of it imo.


    In ‘recorded history’ the ‘few’ have always had it all over the ‘many’; the many seem quite content for it to be that way.


    Personally, I can never see it changing; the many seem quite content in their serfdom; why is this, and is there any way out of it?


    Those of us who refuse to acknowledge the ‘few’ as superior are a minority, and it feels (to me) that it’s a totally useless exercise to think the ‘many’ will ever see the light, as it were; why the hell is this?

    Its got me beat; and I’m sick to fucking death of brain dead humans - or whatever - just carrying on their futile lives while ‘Rome burns’.


    Ive got to the point where I’d rather not be here - wherever here may be.

    Well yes/no / maybe


    Lives are generaly futile to be honest. Very few of us leave any lasting mark on society. Even less a good one.


    That accepted what's the point of existance other than to keep yourself fed warm and entertained and possibly a few kids to pass on the genies 


    Our society is reasonably good at providing the first three. And not to bad at facilitating the last. 


    If you want to rise to a higher level of existance no one is stopping you. It's unfair to require others to join you if they really only want a few beers watch the football and a chicken curry

  9. 7 minutes ago, skitzorat said:


    Zero Tolerance. That should be our new philosophy. Now that it's obvious that "tolerance" was a false value - Marxist language trickery -promoted by filthy subversive perverts who have dragged down all of Western civilization and is now practiced religiously by all the stupid fvckwits of the world. We should never again be duped into thinking this is a good thing.

    The greatest minds of history have warned us against this, equating tolerance with the designs of a collapsing society. We are saddled with de-tolerating all that was once tolerated. 𝗦𝗶𝗲𝗴 𝗛𝗲𝗶𝗹!


    It's not " tolerance that's the issue. 


    It's a variable and! sliding scale of tolerance with some getting far to much and others no where near enough

  10. 20 hours ago, factJack said:

    yes I think it absurd they would carry such an important historical artifact on a war ship especially one engaged in conflict

    I supose its largly how effective you think a relic would be against a missile.  Not very it seems


    The way the russians are performing they possibly need more relics

  11. 48 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    That's a really intresting and insightful quote 


    Its is a fair point when people ask for evidence of evolution to point not to changes in man physical make up but to changes to our culture by technology which will themselves be a driver to our physical changes.


    Much as fire changed our physical make up so will computers etal

  12. 12 hours ago, SimonTV said:


    Thats as close as your going to get from a politician to admitting to significant failures by the govenment. The govenment scientist and the media hype driving the responses. 


    There a obscured admission that most if not all of the removal of freedoms was morally  wrong and at best of no practical benifit 


    He is rather glossing over the fact the govenment was largely responsible for that problem by pointing out other govenmentswere were worse. But hey. He is a member of that govenment. He is not going to throw them under the bus


    It's also the first official admission that I've seen  that the vacines carry a risk. Something that has been strongly denied to this point 


    During lockdown I was verbally attacked and called a mad conspiracy man for saying very much the same thing.  So progress of some sort I suppose

    • Like 1
  13. 4 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    Anyone listen to that Sajid Javid interview I posted, I know it was painful to sit through. But what an insight in to the delusional mind that brought us lockdowns and our amazing £50 billion mass poisoning. 

    I havent. Can you link it or tell me when you posted it. So I can find it !

  14. 3 minutes ago, Anti Facts Sir said:

    I'm sure Earth is on the extra-terrestrial sat nav system.


    Easy to find anyway, that watery shithole just next to the sun.

    I think your probably right.  If they are capable of getting here in anything like a useful time frame they quite probebly already know we are here.


    Turning up tens of thousands of  years from now with an invasion fleet seems a bit pointless 

  15. 1 hour ago, jack121 said:


    You seem to think BJ, the conservatives, MP's are a thing. The country and most of the planet takes its orders from the rothschild's banking system. Rothschild's calls the shots and the politicians are just eunuch figureheads and dickless spokesmen.

    That is possibly true to some extent.  


    If the banking system takes against you as a leader or a govenment or a country then it wont end well


    But I highly doubt they are very concern about boris political career   if he goes someone else who toes the line will take his place.


    To be clear we have a pretence of democracy.  But in order to be convincing on the big stuff you have to let the small stuff run its course 

  16. Just now, DarianF said:


    I definitely agree on the shadiness of that particular institute and anything originating from it (or those like it, of which there are many), claiming to be legitimate science. On the point of creationism and its proponents, I just went digging and found this old classic of Professor Dawkins roasting Creationist nut job Harun Yahya:



    It's amazing how many creationists cite Yahya as some kind of credible source on Biology 🤣. Prime example right here: https://stolenhistory.net/threads/the-evolution-deception.744/

    Here is professor dave exposing cassy as a fabricator, cheat and all round %%%%


    • Thanks 1
  17. 42 minutes ago, Fool Me Once said:

    WW1 Armistice Day




    WW2 D-Day







    Yesterday 16 +(4) 2 (0) (20) = 18 3x6


    I'm betting I can do that for a lot of different dates that are not connected to war at all or alternatively there are very few days were there is not a war somewhere

  18. Just now, Mitochondrial Eve said:


    The arguments were in the post and the links provided, but I am sure you realise that. If not, feel free to review the post again and come back to me. No cutting and pasting was involved.


    I find it interesting that you are critcising my posts which do not conform to your view. In contrast, pro-Darwin posters have linked to videos and other papers etc without giving their analysis of the content - because of this, I have offered feedback in the absence of any input from them. And, after my feedback, there has been no further discussion as to how my comments are flawed. This suggests to me a lack of original thought and a reliance on repeating dogma. Should you really wish to persuade me and readers of this thread to your view, I suggest that you start to engage with the points made and present your research and analysis.


    On that note, your review of the technical literature surrounding the claimed instances of speciation - primary and secondary - would be most welcome. Anything less than that from here on in will not result in any engagement from me.

    I've absolutely no intrest in convincing you. Non at all,or anyone else really .by the time the worms have eaten in to their brains to the extent they call anything from the discovery institute science.  Then it really is a lost cause

    If they were posting I'd debate with them.  But they are not you are. Il point out major flaws. You wont know enough to respond and just say " I didnt write it . Ask them." Which I cant obviously. So a complete waste of your time and my expertise.  I've been round the block. It's like giving a donkey strawberries 


    If you want to throw up your under! Standing il go to the trouble of trying to help ,other than that. Your on your own

    • Confused 1
  19. Just now, Mitochondrial Eve said:


    I am not interested in ad hominems.


    Instead, I look forward to your considered thoughts and analysis of the information presented. As you profess to be so knowledgable on this topic, I am sure it will be no trouble for you to explain why the counter-arguments presented by Luskin and Wells in respect of speciation are wrong along with the scientific findings cited concerning the plains viscacha rat.


    I notice that you do not provide sources or evidence to support your views in this thread. You make claims and then ask other people to complete the research you have failed to provide. This is not, in my view, a helpful contribution to discussion.

    You explain why they are right. Your the proposer after all. This time in your own words with out cutting and paisting and il see if I can obligate


    Its not an adhom attack to point out he is part of an organisation set up to exploit the gullible or surprising that you fell for it. 



    • Like 1
  20. 17 minutes ago, JCP said:

    We very well might not be able to tell the difference, but without knowing Rosin's and Monast's claims, we wouldn't have the insight to question it.

    I'm fascinated how you would question the differance between a convincing fake and the real thing. Let's say they death ray blast the white house to bits as an opening salvo, just to get out attention. How are you going to critically analyse that event armed with your fore sight ?


    Clearly the aliens are coming/ already here lot will fall for it hook line and sinker. 


    The NASA is the devil lot will just say it's a false flag  how will you steer a rational course through it ?

  21. Just now, Morpheus said:

    It's not, this is why we need to get active on every local area and start taking effect at grass roots. It won't change if we don't try. 

    I'm with you. The complete lack of intrest in local politics is to the deficient of our democracy 

  • Create New...