On May 3, 10:05 am, Jos=E9 Carlos Santos <jcsan...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 03-05-2008 17:23, JSH wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>>>> But that pails in comparison to the ****fts that far more powerful
> >>>>>> people in the shadow governments have done, even as various
politic=
al
> >>>>>> regimes have toppled with the latest just occurring in Britain.
> >>>>> I have to admit that I missed that one. What are you talking
about?
> >>>> The Government lost heavily in local elections last Thursday. This
> >>>> only affects control of local councils not the composition of
> >>>> Parliament.
Seehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk_politics/2008/=
local_elections_...
> >>>> rossum
> >>> Yup. I was dealing with a nonsensical response as in comparison to
> >>> the search string "definition of mathematical proof" coming up
highly
> >>> for me the poster put up some wacky crap, so I just babbled in
reply,
> >>> which I find is kind of fun at times. (I started a response that
> >>> included the word "fool" multiple times but decided not to post it.)
> >>> It's sort of the way I just throw up my hands and say screw it.
> >>> Kind of fun, as a weird way of expressing frustration and it
generates=
> >>> buzz.
> >>> The really scary government changes occurred a while back in
Australia=
> >>> and I think, was it Spain?
> >> In Spain, they had a Socialist government, they had general elections
> >> two months ago and the Socialist Party won again. Is this an example
of=
> >> of "various political regimes [that] have toppled"?
>
> > Go back further...
>
> >>> I could go on and on with "coincidences" around things I say, but
it's=
> >>> not something I take too seriously as I don't think it's real, you
> >>> know? So it's part of the mythology that I write around my own
life,
> >>> following Joseph Campbell's POWER OF MYTH.
> >>> In that way I'm a mythological hero in my own tale, so in that
> >>> context, just about anything can be possible, but why take it too
> >>> seriously, you know?
> >> It looks as if *you* take it seriously.
>
> > It's a hoot! You're just going to contradict whatever I say anyway...
>
> > Oh, as for government changes, go back to the Australian one when
> > Howard got the boot--which I notice you didn't mention--and look for
> > what other nation had a quick change at the SAME TIME.
>
> Your were *not* talking about government changes, but about "various
> political regimes [that] have toppled".
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jose Carlos Santos
Like I said, you're just going to contradict whatever I say...
So Howard's loss in Australia was not a toppling to you? And you
can't find any other country that saw some significant event around
the same time?
And you think you're a mathematician?
Why? Please explain your qualifications for everyone.
And remember people, I say mathematicians routinely lie, but lies
can't stop consequences.
Mathematicians play their games and the world changes, but they just
deny it. My analysis indicates this state of affairs can continue
only because civilization removes the intelligence premium--stupid
people face little to no consequences versus in the past usually not
reproducing.
So civilization counters evolution until evolution forces itself back
and as the balance is restored you get rapid change, which I think is
catastrophic in line with chaos theory, which is also ironic.
Given the HUGE benefits to humanity from civilization, my projections
are for a 90% correction when evolution finally breaks through the
civilization barrier and forces people, to be, well, smart, or else.
It's like, the higher the rise, the greater the fall, which is
consistent with some of the environmental changes just starting as a
result of global warming, which was preventable if intelligent
decisions had been made to control energy usage and find a better
population balance.
So the short of it is, civilization makes for a stupider population as
humanity devolves with the loss of evolutionary pressures, until the
system corrects itself, which will be a MASSIVE correction, and the
best way to understand how great the devolutionary pressures have been
is to consider that most people still have no clue of what global
warming can actually do.
That ignorance is a measure of just how far human devolution has gone.
James Harris
|
