PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

MD69 wrote:"I am the slime from your video oozing along on your living room floor "....

I like zapa every day more!

cheers

"I am the slime oozing out from your TV set"

G

A lot of the EU countries have huge advantages over the U.S.. One thing holding us back is the enormous amount of god fearing inbreds.

...A lot of the EU countries...

I seriously doubt it, but we're catching up to the 'advantages'.

All I want is a two month 'holiday' during the Summer so I can slack off like the Euros get to do

G

braincell wrote:A lot of the EU countries have huge advantages over the U.S.. One thing holding us back is the enormous amount of god fearing inbreds.

that statement is, imho, pure project mockingbird-level nonsense(well, it sounds good anyway).

the elite that you love are the most inbred people on the planet. go ahead, check the royal bloodlines. the EU is run by inbreds just like here. check the Obama, Bush, Kennedy, Cheney, et al bloodlines. the ones making the most noise about bad breeding disasters are literally the "kings" of such things. ask charles darwin and his mad and retarded children about it...

Let' go for chrity.
Republicans are spending Palin outfits to the poor:

garyb wrote:

braincell wrote:A lot of the EU countries have huge advantages over the U.S.. One thing holding us back is the enormous amount of god fearing inbreds.

that statement is, imho, pure project mockingbird-level nonsense(well, it sounds good anyway).

the elite that you love are the most inbred people on the planet. go ahead, check the royal bloodlines. the EU is run by inbreds just like here. check the Obama, Bush, Kennedy, Cheney, et al bloodlines. the ones making the most noise about bad breeding disasters are literally the "kings" of such things. ask charles darwin and his mad and retarded children about it...

According to Charles Darwin's theories, which should be understood well before bashing them, the key for better life is crossbreeding and biodiversity.

I'm still stumbled on how misunderstood is Darwin. The core of what he said has been proved with the genetic studies much more recently.
It has been observed, without any doubt, that in any specie's reproduction, i.e. replication of the dna combination of the generating individuals there are very high amounts of variations and re-combination "errors" which are of environmental origin or casual, given the possibilities. This leads to new individuals which can show some very strong deviations from the generating ones and sometimes these deviations are classified as mutations, as some basic characters of the organism are changed.
Those "errors" happen continuously but there is a prevalent trend of stability, after all the main mechanism is replication.

Those alterations of the original characters can generate individuals that are better or not equipped to have a success in the environment. There is no difference between the ability to reach food not available for others or looking more attractive in a social environment. The fact that is indisputable is that better chances to survive and relate with the world increase the opportunities that such characters, such genetic features reproduce themselves. If you are better equipped to survive it will be easier for you to have a discendance. So those genetic features are transmitted more than others.
What comes out of this is that crossbreeding is the best way to dilute some flaws that can be present in a certain family or bloodline. This has been so well observed in the extreme weakness of the Pharaos', which only were married with their sisters to keep the power in the family and, while the genetic causes were not known, very soon most of the cultures issued taboos against intra-family reproduction, as the effects where evident.

That is no voodoo. I think it's such an elementary concept that it's hard to argue with. That is basically what Darwin said. A better genetic equipment has more chances to reproduce itself. Hence evolution.

stardust wrote:I assume the amount of christians is not different to US.
The type might be a bit different, but thats speculation based on a 500+ year old story of radical sect pilgrims taking refuge in northeast america to enjoy their demons.

The real difference is IMHO that the fundamentalistic sects play no societal role in Europe.

Yet, the Vatican and Jesuits practically OWN Europe (and the US).

G

alfonso, that's real funny about old Charles D.

he and his family only married Wedgewoods and Galtons(the three families had a pact), in order to concentrate the "good" genes. in fact, his father married a Wedgewood and then he Married a Wedgewood, his mother's niece. when his wife died, he married his auntie. go ahead and check how many of his children were retarded and how many died in the nuthouse!

none of Charle's theories were his own, amd it was Aldous Huxley's grandfather who made him a star. the man was a fraud, sorry.

garyb wrote:alfonso, that's real funny about old Charles D.

he and his family only married Wedgewoods and Galtons(the three families had a pact), in order to concentrate the "good" genes. in fact, his father married a Wedgewood and then he Married a Wedgewood, his mother's niece. when his wife died, he married his auntie. go ahead and check how many of his children were retarded and how many died in the nuthouse!

none of Charle's theories were his own, amd it was Aldous Huxley's grandfather who made him a star. the man was a fraud, sorry.

I have absolutely no idea of all the gossip around his family or whatever nor I care about the real origin of his ideas and his biography although i know he was a strange personality and that ideas are always derived and never totally original.

I only care about the evolution theory that I explained above and which makes perfect sense to me. Not because Homer didn't exist at all you could say that the Odyssey is not a masterpiece.

According to that theory I stand on what I said above, You can't argue its logic and the fact that genetic studies gave a precise description of the mechanisms that are involved.

Remember the tale of the Moon and the Finger?

the evolution theory as espoused by Darwin has been revised many times and is known to be faulty. the mechanisms of genetics are poorly understood and are VERY old concepts, much older than Darwin. also, the facts around Darwin's flawed breeding practices are not merely gossip, they are facts that impact on the man's work. truly, they were the main point of his work and he wrote extensively about the importance of breeding the "best" people together to make the uberman, which he was sure would be birthed by his small circle of family/cronies very near his own lifetime. the way we got to talking about these things was that i mentioned that although braincell thinks the commoners are just inbred fools, the truly inbred ARE the elite and that breeding is the elite's main focus. the Hapsburg jaw being a prime example. all these guys talk about is "good breeding" and "noble" characteristics! they breed dogs, horses, roses, oranges and humans. the elite only breed with the elite and usually with close relatives like cousins and sometimes even siblings(historically, as in ancient Egypt).

there's no doubt that genetics is a reality and that forms unfold and even modify themselves to fit the environment(as in epigenetics), but that's got nothing to do with Darwin, although he gets credit most of the time(too much credit, imho).

obviously Alfonso, the statement "What comes out of this is that crossbreeding is the best way to dilute some flaws that can be present in a certain family or bloodline. This has been so well observed in the extreme weakness of the Pharaos', which only were married with their sisters to keep the power in the family and, while the genetic causes were not known, very soon most of the cultures issued taboos against intra-family reproduction, as the effects where evident." has been shown to be true. i'm not arguing that. i'm saying that the elite don't seem to believe that as they actually practice the opposite and are the truly inbred. i would say that the problems of inbreeding are well understood by the elite and even by the ancient Egyptians(they knew how to breed cats cattle and wheat, for example), but that they still find some twisted advantage to inbreeding. the wealthy and powerful are always obsessed with purebreds..

We're all descended from other worldly genetic intervention though right?

some think that.



i wonder were those otherworldly folk came from.....

I dunno, but they had huge skulls.

oh yeah, those jerks.

i was going to kick one in the nuts once, but he seemed lacking, so i just punched him in the nose and told him "that's for being such a troublemaker and keeping all the secrets for yourself!"....

Maybe it's not really alien ancestors that have been keeping all the secrets of human origin to themselves though...

garyb wrote: i'm saying that the elite don't seem to believe that as they actually practice the opposite and are the truly inbred. i would say that the problems of inbreeding are well understood by the elite and even by the ancient Egyptians(they knew how to breed cats cattle and wheat, for example), but that they still find some twisted advantage to inbreeding. the wealthy and powerful are always obsessed with purebreds..

At least in Italy , since the ancient Roman empire and through all the foreign rules and mixes, we had an incredible melting of genes, this is basically true for all the Mediterranean area. Probably the only common element you find today in the elites is no more a genetic but cultural-anthropological, like silicon tits and botox treatments. We have some strange mutations like a Premier who looks everyday younger (and more fascist), and a sort of other phenomena that effectively put some doubts about the meaning of evolution but o.t.o.h. completely eliminate the possibility that a superior being is responsible of all this.
But inbreeding seems impossible here, the exceptions are not relevant.

alfonso wrote:

garyb wrote: i'm saying that the elite don't seem to believe that as they actually practice the opposite and are the truly inbred. i would say that the problems of inbreeding are well understood by the elite and even by the ancient Egyptians(they knew how to breed cats cattle and wheat, for example), but that they still find some twisted advantage to inbreeding. the wealthy and powerful are always obsessed with purebreds..

At least in Italy , since the ancient Roman empire and through all the foreign rules and mixes, we had an incredible melting of genes, this is basically true for all the Mediterranean area. Probably the only common element you find today in the elites is no more a genetic but cultural-anthropological, like silicon tits and botox treatments. We have some strange mutations like a Premier who looks everyday younger (and more fascist), and a sort of other phenomena that effectively put some doubts about the meaning of evolution but o.t.o.h. completely eliminate the possibility that a superior being is responsible of all this.
But inbreeding seems impossible here, the exceptions are not relevant.

for the commoners, even high born commoners, but among the truly elite it is not so. also, do not forget, that the true high-born considers other true high-borns to be of the same tribe, regardless of skin color. power and other such "noble" pursuits being a major component. still if you look at royalty, no matter the tribal last name, they ARE all related, even in Italy...

once again, i'm not denying many principles of genetics, far from it! i am mocking Darwin's interpretation if anything. his personal family breeding experiments gone so wrong that he deserves it...

but again, the only reason i even started down this line of thinking was that braincell talked about the bunch of inbreds holding him back, speaking about simple normal "folk". i was merely pointing out the the elite were at least and likely much much more inbred, a simple fact that the British and Dutch royal family(and all the others) or even John Kerry and George Bush's family trees all attest to.

stardust wrote:

Shroomz~> wrote:Maybe it's not really alien ancestors that have been keeping all the secrets of human origin to themselves though...

Actually we dont know enough at all.
There is strong evidence that our extrapolations are right.

Aliens as well as some creator craftsmen make life simpler. In case this simple life is bringing anything forward I might accept it.

My suspicion is that aliens and almighty creator theories do not help to get a better grip on the things we mess with.

hmmm, there are some things children shouldn't mess with...

if you really don't know how the thing works, don't %$%^ with it...

my suspicion is that there are a lot of arrogant jerks who are making things harder by messing with them.

garyb wrote: my suspicion is that there are a lot of arrogant jerks who are making things harder by messing with them.

Isn't that called "human nature"?

it's some of human nature anyway...