Yah it is. When our Harveys and Jefferys emerge though we may get discount sats for a while in the carnage is the upside. Some dark clouds have sats lining heh

Meant to reply here lol.

https://primal.net/e/note1f3r7nnsd5ahyu8xzavnjjckh3y8tuwamufqzhg8mqrzsms9ajmeq8g3mzz

for the moment yah. But I have been tracking the magnet on this run as center of this channel. Have been doing TP partial TP at top of channel and accumulating the bottom. So far the hypothesis holds. Just my t cents. I totally agree with your read of the moment though.

oh yah that look. Thats the look the repeaters get when they run the pruning algorithm. You are being pruned from the repeater network and made not of.

The phrase is misleading. Its the debtor thats forgiven. Thats why mostly only their frens get the good forgiveness.

I think, maybe

Musashi: Hai

Dead Sea Scrolls: Hold my beer

Rip

You are not the voices in your head. you were conscious before you had words so those words are not you.

zapped you

Bots. so many . So So many

Am a cartoon frog bro

Cool. Thanks for the chat.

OK. The author says up front that it is an opinion piece for starters but also references some out of date science with respect to genetic distance. Also basing his thoughts on old science (not his fault it was 2008). The science has progressed and some of those blanks he fills with deduction and belief have been filled in with new tech and evidence. Here is a link to newer info that has been peer reviewed and results replicated.

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1684-5#Sec9

Just got back from outside. will read now.

I will just quote one of the comments on that piece as my initial response. I think I have seen this before but gonna give it a quick read to make sure its the same brand of gordian pseudo logic and appeal to philosophy that I remember. This fella thinks so but am gonna go look. Cuz thats what polite people do when sent new info.

Interesting. The author raises a lot of interesting facts, points of view, and even value judgments. He is publishing in the face of a religious opposition, an unacknowledged “church” or “faith community” he terms Egalitarianism. It is as good a label as any for the dominant philosophical “faith” governing Occidental civilization, presently. In that sense, it is refreshing to see. This is a challenge that needs to be raised. Superstitious orthodoxy is no friend of science, or even the health of human community and society.

That said, the author is not strictly publishing a scientific position in this work. This is a work of competing religious/philosophical/sociological nature, embodying value judgments about the facts and science upon which the work expounds. It is a challenge to the reigning orthodoxy, the reigning religious worldview, but it is, nonetheless a competing religion/philosophy. If you want to understand this, just read Chapter 29. The author’s “reasons” are not strictly science; they are philosophy, sentiment, religion and aesthetic preferences. The author would like you to believe that the work is entirely dispassionate science, but this claim is patently not true. The reader will have to come to his own conclusions about the author’s normative judgments, as well as conclusions about the veracity and accuracy of the science, but I personally believe that it is better that these topics were discussed openly, and with as much honesty as possible than see them summarily banished from the arena of human discourse as heresy, anathema, and taboo by the Church of Egalitarianism.

Ok. hahaha. I am retarded. You should stop wasting your time on me.

I am a cartoon frog on the internet bro. I dont think your insult applies kek

I tried repeatedly to say good bye hospitably. Now you are judging my race and assuming you have the power to move me. Be better.

yah, i made and account and went for an amble. I think I lost IQ points over there but am sure that I lost some faith in humanity. It's the hood of social media and meta is the old folks home.

Nostr is ranchland.