Disagree, though flattered to be called young.
Also insulted to be called a communist retard. I identify as a distributist retard.
Discussion
yeah, distribute stuff by taking it from people who earned it honestly. that's the definition of a communist.
in teh old days they called that a "thief" and a "shyster"
also, #dyor
i'm not gonna teach you about the history i lived through being born in the late 70s. i saw all of it. if you don't care to understand it, you are a victim of those who claim to know better but are really just manipulating you.
I was also born in the late 70's. I saw it as well, but I started with a different worldview and as such have a different understanding. You presume that if I don't agree with you then I don't care to understand it and have been manipulated. I say you lacked trust-worthy mentors and had to come to your own conclusions without the proper foundations.
I commend your rigor, but doubt your conclusions.
rigor is everything
i taught myself, based on what i read.
i never trusted mentors from the beginning. everyone has been taught by biased teachers. i taught myself. i rigorously reject anything that doesn't match up with the whole pattern, as i understand it.
if you don't evaluate the complex against first principles, you can be fooled.
I agree with all that. That is what I commend you for. But it also leads you astray when you presume that you have done due diligence but haven't. The polar shift concerns are an example. Most of the data you cite in support of timelines is flat out wrong by many orders of magnitude. Like how long the solar system takes to orbit the galaxy.
If amended to how often the solar-system crosses the galactic plane it is still wrong.
I am not saying none of it can happen, I am saying your reasons for believing it are false. Believing the right thing for the wrong reasons is barely better than believing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons.
Trust is everything. Find good mentors. You aren't going to get there on your own. I know I can't.
ok, first lesson:
the galactic current sheet is not a two dimensional surface, it is an oscillating plasma emission that comes from the centre of all of the stars in the galaxy, dominated by the giant stars in the center.
it is fuzzy and it doesn't have boundaries, it's fuzzy. it swings up and down like a ... i forget the name of it, some spanish dance where the women wear these skirts that are essentially a circle that drapes down and when they spin it, by the bournulli (fuck my spelling) effect it spins as a flat disk with ripples.
the evidence of cyclic geomagnetic reversals is far from arguable. there is evidence for every single one going back at least until 72000 years ago, the most recent one has been dubbed the "tianchi" excursion because the most irrefutable evidence of its occurance is found in china near the Tianchi volcano.
i have too many things to deal with in learning and mastering computer programming to be a "reliable mentor" on the subject of the pole shift physics, and furthermore, the influence of electromagnetic effects in play across the universe, in planets, in stars, and in galaxies, is greatly misunderstood by the mainstream of science, who have had their minds polluted with this narrative about "the unwashed masses" causing disaster.
the fact that the disasters happen regardless of, and not only regardless of our activities, DRIVE our civilization cycles, should be enough but until you understand that LOGICALLY bigger things have greater influence than smaller things, you will not get it.
Locality matters, gradients matter. Please go get a compass and a refrigerator magnet. Do some experimenting and report back what has a greater effect on your compass. The magnet placed an inch away, the earth, the sun, or the galaxy.
you are talking about the entire galactic magnetic field
of course it is strong enough to impact ... everything, about what way electrons can travel through plasma.
i don't think it's even arguable that stars emit plasma constantly, they are called:
coronal mass ejections
coronal holes
stellar wind
plasma filament eruptions
you add the "billions and billions" of stars and multiply that by their diameters and consider the fact that part of the reason why all those stars exist at all is because of all that plasma flying out and then cooling down and picking up electrons carried by this disc why galaxies are... you know... discs. at all.
also, i find it insulting that you question my understanding of one of the most basic laws of physics, the inverse square law of radiative emission.
i happen to also know quite well how Boyle's Law operates with regard to pressure and temperature, and this also has some play in the whole picture because stars have incredible atmospheric pressures and that's why they emit so much plasma.
also, just fucking look up the location of the magnetic poles of the earth and how they have moved over the last 200 years or so.
i remember a news story about how far northern airports in canada or northern states of USA had to relabel their landing strips because of it.
i pay attention to these things, and that's why i watch space weather news pod every day, even though mostly he isn't teaching me something new, he is digging up endless amounts of more data confirming the hypothesis of the pole shift.
i certainly wouldn't want to be so stupid as to doubt it, to the point where i'm planning to relocate to the carpathian mountains where the least chance of being washed away in europe is, because i don't care to go to the rockies or mongolia. the rest of the planet is fucked. and good riddance, if God is "doing this" then he's doing the right thing. and it's coming up soon. could be 5 years, could be 10, could be 20, but it will happen before the 30 year point.
I don't question your understanding of it. The proposed experiment was rhetorical to remind you or it. I think you aren't applying it in your logic. Gradients matter. You were talking about cause and effect, claiming that greater causes have greater effects even on small scales like earth. But that isn't true. Change requires an energy gradient. You can't sit in a boat in the middle of lake Meade and admire all the energy you have. It is useless. Yes there is a ton of energy there but it cannot create change with no gradient. You have to be local to the dam to do anything with it. Even a small stream with a foot high waterfall creates more change than being in the middle of the lake.
Likewise, over the vast distances of the galaxy, the potential energy difference from one side of the earth to the other, is miniscule. This is why our compass doesn't even register it. Yes the absolute energy is enormous but it cannot effect humans on anything like the scale of a refrigerator magnet falling off your fridge.
Super novas are a whole 'nother thing, very gradienty.
gradients, by which you mean the rate of pressure towards a change in orientation, which is not even really just a gradient because that's just a momentary measurement.
pressure matters a lot.
also, if the earth's magnetic field is so insignificant, explain why this planet has life on it and none of the others before the asteroid belt. oh yeah, because it's bigger and has a self-generated magnetic field caused by the rotational inertia of the mass, and the composition of its core which is primarily iron, with a little nickel and cobalt.
the crust is not made out of this kind of material. it's mostly silico-aluminates and where there is high densities of iron, it creates strong magnetic fields.
the pole shift phenomenon comes from the differential of magnetic alignments between the crust and the very heavy core which pretty much stays stable in its orientation relative to the rest of the cores of every celestial body in the galaxy. the crusts are light, in comparison, and if you understand that there is a strong, ambient magnetic field coming from the currrents in the plasma emitted by the galaxy, then you get it when i say "this field rotates every 6000 years and the crusts are prone to realignment with the ambient field because they are light and because of the increased currrent caused by the asymptotic curve of the "wavy" shape of the galactic current sheet.
anyway, i understand why it happens, and i can sit down and dig up dozens of references to back it up but ultimately, what really matters is this:
do you think if the signs are saying the field is rapidly flipping 90 degrees that we should consider where we are living on this planet if it can induce a slip of the crust to a new orientation?
i think, duh.
also, further to understand it, the sun is very close to us
it is emitting masses of plasma, sporadically, all the time, and over this plasma, a lot of electric current travels.
this current charges up our atmosphere and charges dust which causes condensation of water, water does not form droplets without a nucleus, and that is generally a tiny particle of dust covered in electrons.
the seismic activity and volcanic activity under our feet is also fed by this. most of the electrons that stimulate this activity come from the sun, and arc down via the earth's magnetic field into the polar regions, and then propagate across the rest of the planet. these currents cause piezo effects in the largely silicate based rock underneath us, as well as heating up the magma underneath.
when the earth's magnetic field is interfered with, by the galactic current sheet, it becomes weaker, more of that current goes down into the poles, and more of the current goes down through the L shells of the van allen belt and causes crazy weather, increased seismic and volcanic activity, and when the field collapses, the whole system becomes spastic, the enengy from the sun actually hits us, the magma interface of the crust boils and the crust wants to realign with the new orientation of the current sheet.
it takes a lot of words to describe it but in my mind it's pictures. that's why i also don't use "technically correct" words because i'm trying to transmit an image to you.
That isn't distributism. Distributism respects the right to personal property. It isn't an economic system, it is a philosophy that as many people should be business owners as possible. Instead of big corporations or the state owning means of production, it favors small businesses. The distributism is that means of production should be widely distributed not concentrated like in communism or crony capitalism.
that's actually what the non-commie definition of capitalism is.
and you probably didn't know that capitalist was originally a perjorative from the ruling class against those who saved money and developed the concept of factories, which are the foundation of the industrial revolution
we be the niggers. you don't need to invent a new term. you need to learn about the history
Capitalism contains a lack of self-restraint in competition. The backlash has been over-regulation by the state to keep powerful competitors in check. Complete self-serving can't be it even if moral behavior is incentivized by competition, because there is the case where no competitors act morally and the barriers to entry are too high.
So yes a new word is needed to describe a more selfless capitalism.
Like I said it is more of a philosophy that doesn't have a good model for how to achieve it in the modern world. I wouldn't advocate achieving it through force so I am left to ponder what conditions would allow smaller entities to flourish. I think limiting the size and complexity of the body of law would be a start. Regulatory capture is a problem.
the restraint of competition of the market is superior entrepreneurs.
"powerful competitors" hitch a ride on the fallacy of the necessity of government to gain an unfair advantage by changing the law.
i'm not going to redefine plenty sufficient old terms, just because you got your mind poisoned by communist propaganda.
precisely, not using force, is the whole point and centre of how it works.
it will prevail, and always prevails whenever there is no big tyrannical oligarchy in the picture. there is numerous parts of teh world where unfettered capitalism is in play. they are the best places in the world.