GENIUS FORUMS

hsandman wrote:lol, belligerent neurotic.

Brainless liar.

Do you think AIDS increased our life expectancy? Do you think cancer increased our life expectancy? Do you think quicksilver in our bodies increased life expectancy? Nuclear bombs? Constant wars?

And yet despite all those things, our life expectancy is way higher than it was at any other point in human history.

But liars like you don't look at evidence. You use facts like a drunk uses a lamppost -- for support rather than illumination.

Yes, there are a medical institutions that care for us, but only when there is money involved in it, and now, if there is more money if you die than live, then you will die. Look up a word psychopaths.

Look up the word 'arithmetic'.

Psychopaths, Parasites and rampant bureaucracy

Don't forget the Masons and the Templars.

driven by the endless workforce turning labor into a tangible object = money is the system. Money that ever so slowly gets skimmed from the masses by a swindles like wars and taxes and for 100 years by a devious device that is called Federal Bank.

Like i said, you don't know basic economics...

The free will of a 95% human race population completely in someone else’s hands… The hands of monster - The millitary Industrial Complex.

But you know better! your tinfoil hat protects you from their insidious mind control rays!

Idiot, bloody fucking idiot, you don't even know that a magnet expends on energy or that you have to consider both costs and benefits when doing cost/benefit analysis. You are a fucking ignorant conspiracy nut.

Romans had 2000+ years of dictatorship.

has someone re-invented history while i was napping?

What will happen when we start running out of resources? The human population is exploding despite all the hazards present in the modern world ?

How fucking ignorant can you be?

Malthus had predicted the original malthusian armageddon to occur at 1bn population. That number passed with nary a whisper. We are well over 6bn population now. Population growth projections estimate that the world population will max out at 9-10bn, sometime in the second half of this century. incidentally, it is projected that at our current level of technology, Earth if capable of sustaining 9bn population. By the time we actually reach that number, our technological capabilities will have improved ever further. Resource availability is a funciton of both the raw materials and our technological ability to make efficient use of them -- and the real resource availability has been growing. For example, where before we needed copper for every wire, now most wires have been replaced by optic fibers, which are made from fucking sand. Read up on the Simon-Ehlich wager -- an idiot like you had bet that the resources will go up in price over the span of a decade, as they get used up. Turned out that every one of those resources went down in inflation-adjusted dollars, and all but one even went down in nominal dollars.

Fools like malthus see humanity as a sea of hungry mouths, but they forget that the hungry mouths come with hard-working hands and thinking brains.

The technology is our savior for now, while we are needed, what will happen when we are no longer needed? Or wanted? Or possibly sustained?

i guess you will have to work as my personal french maid then.

Overpopulation/explosion/population growth globally (which there is)

And slowing down... and is expected to stop in about 5 decades. You didn't bother to acquire even the most cursory understanding of the subject, did you, idiot?

than tying to curb the population would be 1 child policy.(Like in China now)

Aha, i was waiting for that. Totalitarianism is shining through! Bloody good show. So you are dumb, ignorant, and totalitarian. You can apply for the job in DMV, and i am sure you will make it to assistant manager in no time flat.

I am not against free trade and technology,

No, you are much worse -- you are against reality.

Life expectancy has increased dramatically in modern times. You have absolutely no argument here, hsandman. This is not a matter of values, opinion, or anything else of that nature. Mountains of data exist and they are conclusive. Your position is completely untenable in the most final and absolute sense. It's no-win.

Just an "FYI" sort of thing. Carry on if it's a hole you feel compelled to dig.

Life expectancy is longer, but that's mostly because the number of childhood and infant deaths is very much lower than in the past. The longevity of those who reach adulthood hasn't changed much if I'm not mistaken.

A while ago i had looked at expected life duration of those who survived to adulthood in late-medieval England and France. it was something like 50 or 60 years. if you have any data to support your contention, please post it.

Furthermore, this is not an argument against our increased life expectancy -- it would only be that if infant mortality didn't matter, but it does. That our child mortality is so much less (it used to be around 30%) it itself a major merit of our system.

Life expectancy for those who survived childhood actually went down slightly with urbanization during the Industrial Revolution (because the cities had awful sanitation and lots of airborne lung-destroying chemicals), but it increased once industrial working and living conditions saw significant improvements in the twentieth century.

I can believe it. Life in the 19th century industrial city was one shitty thing.

Unidian wrote:Life expectancy has increased dramatically in modern times. You have absolutely no argument here, hsandman. This is not a matter of values, opinion, or anything else of that nature. Mountains of data exist and they are conclusive. Your position is completely untenable in the most final and absolute sense. It's no-win.

Just an "FYI" sort of thing. Carry on if it's a hole you feel compelled to dig.

The life expectancy was vicadons counter argument to my post that we (the human race) are getting screwed.

There is a lot of gray area when we are talking averages of a populations life expectancy. Statistics are a very tricky thing. I was not saying that people have it as bad/worse as before, and yes modern medicine with its antibiotics (which is pretty recent advancement 1928) is offsetting the harm that is inflicted on the masses by system of corporate organisms that favor psychopaths in leadership positions.

If vicodan was not a deluded, pedantic troll who can't stop using insults as arguments, I would have spent the time and dug up links and references etc. instead of just putting him on ignore. This topic is just a waste of time really, I knew it was going to be, after I started answering to him more.

In any case there is a lot of bad things with the good, such as cancer, etc. Unethical business, industry and medical practices that go on in modern society, suppressed by totally corrupt and criminal governments and media. <- Them.

That is the point though… on the surface there seems to be everything fine, it is just when you start to dig for answers yourself that you find that not all is what it seems.


From wikipedia.

Nearly all cancers are caused by abnormalities in the genetic material of the transformed cells. These abnormalities may be due to the effects of carcinogens, such as tobacco smoke, radiation, chemicals, or infectious agents. Other cancer-promoting genetic abnormalities may be randomly acquired through errors in DNA replication, or are inherited, and thus present in all cells from birth.

Most forms of cancer are "sporadic", and have no basis in heredity.


Every year, at least 200,000 people die worldwide from cancer related to their workplace. [20] Millions of workers run the risk of developing cancers such as lung cancer and mesothelioma from inhaling asbestos fibers and tobacco smoke, or leukemia from exposure to benzene at their workplaces.[20] Currently, most cancer deaths caused by occupational risk factors occur in the developed world.[20] It is estimated that approximately 20,000 cancer deaths and 40,000 new cases of cancer each year in the U.S. are attributable to occupation.[21]

Top 10 Causes of death <- follow the corrolation between cancer and industrial development.

This question sort of goes with "What is intelligence?"

I was so far ahead in early school at 8 years old that I was allowed to read comics. But at that point I sort of stopped bothering to listen to the teacher. Then I stopped bothering to go to school. For not going to school, I was sent to a boarding school, but I was only really trying in a few subjects, and had a real phobia of math's. I seem to have a high intelligence for figuring things out, which has replaced my ability to use math's. So when it came to my math's exam, I hadn't done hardly any math's at all.... but I passed. I managed to figure out the math's paper during the exam itself. I had to get the answers by using my other intelligence which is solving problems. So this education level question does not describe me. I am more like columbo, and I solve physics, and quantum physics just by using intelligence. But I think that my lack of math's knowledge is to my favour anyway, because a lot of mathematicians cannot see their failings. Like.. space is supposed to be a void, but my intelligence says that a wave is a pattern that cannot happen in a void. It's a wriggly line that needs guiding, else it would be intelligent. So I found what exists in space, and it's my snowflake machine. A bubble is the simplest thing to happen from barely anything, And you can get the hexigon from two bubbles pressed together, which over time carried the sentience, which over time became pathways, and stretched, then carried all of the particles known to man. And a wave is just a pathway undergoing energy transfers.

Pincho Paxton wrote:This question sort of goes with "What is intelligence?"

So I found what exists in space, and it's my snowflake machine.

>_> wtf? Explain?

edit:

I kinda see what you are trying to describe, but the way you write this is confusing; You found a snowflake machine in space? <- sound like a raving.

snowflake machine = is it something like turing machine?

And you can get the hexigon from two bubbles pressed together,

I hadn't done hardly any math's at all.

intelligence which has replaced my ability to use math's.(for figuring things out)

I think that my lack of math's knowledge is to my favour anyway, because a lot of mathematicians cannot see their failings.

You need to put more care in to crafting your sentances, if you want people to understand what you are saying. These sentances are illogical.

ps. Why are you explaining yourself to somone who would not be able to grasp it anyway, if you were genius? He gave himself away in 2 posts. Ignore him.

hsandman wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:This question sort of goes with "What is intelligence?"

So I found what exists in space, and it's my snowflake machine.

>_> wtf? Explain?

edit:

I kinda see what you are trying to describe, but the way you write this is confusing; You found a snowflake machine in space? <- sound like ravings.

snowflake machine = is it something like turing machine?

I do tend not to explain things, because I live a complete set of selfmade science, and it would be a 500 page book to go through it all. Yes, it's a naturally developed turing machine. It's hexagon in shape (Look around you, everything is hexagonal.. it takes time to see it, because the brain has developed a boredom of hexagons, and so squashes them into squares, and other shapes) It has threads from each hexagon to the next, and the threads are like powerlines. In the middle of each hexagon is the sentience which decides how to propogate materials. A photon, for example is propogated with great power, turning the sentience white. We see the glow of the sentience, not the actual photon, which probably does not exist anyway. A snowflake is a gas that has become so fine that it managed to freeze around the hexagonal sections of the machine. The snowflake has then locked sentience inside its centre. Thus the snowflake has enough intelligence to repeat its own shape, over, and over, in the same way that a human baby can grow from baby to adult. So a snowflake actually shows a scaled up version of the machine. However, it was not by looking at a snowflake that I found the machine, it was by coming up with a way to explain quantum physics. I was trying to fix quantum physics to physics. I decided that the only way that an observer could pass information to a particle would be through a powerline from their body to the room. I had to understand this powerline, and I was thinking of a shape that did not have spaces between it, because if a void in space, cannot be a void, then it has to be a shape that joins together. I started with a grid of squares. However, I did not think that squares were a very natural shape to occur at the beginning of the universe. A square seems like a complex shape, with parts, and it took me a year to go through all of the shapes in my head to get to the simplest shape of all.. a bubble. So I imagined the bubbles forming slowly through time, like a bubbling pond, and started to imagine them squashing together. Now you get hexagons, and dodecahedrons. Then I imagined them wobbling in lines, and rows, and a wave pattern started to emerge. I looked at magnets with iron filings around them, and could clearly see invisible bubbles between the iron filings. But like I say, you have to fill all of the gaps in the universe with bubbles, so you have to go with hexagons, or dodecahedrons. I started to notice how all of nature is hexagon, I can even see that perspective is actually a hexagon view of the world. (Very strange!) I noticed that our head is hexagon, our body is hexagon, our feet, our hands. So I dropped the dodecahedron, and went with just hexagon. So now I needed to add the waves to the hexagon shape. Leaning back, and forward they would create waves, and with spiderlike webs between them they could pass information more easily. I had already added quantum physics to this model, and you can get materials that are invisible by taking away the positive/negative energy. This thing creates positive/negative energy so it does not actuallly have to have them as part of its structure. When I added the wires, and the sentience at the centre, and fixed all of quantum physics to physics I was still struggling with the exact shape of this thing with all of the parts added. I noticed that saturn has a hexagon at its centre, I noticed that the ozone hole is hexagon shaped. This hexagon is a mandelbrot, so you get ever repeating hexagons, getting larger, and larger. I wanted to find the smallest hexagons on Earth. Whilst searching google, I saw a snowflake, and it was what I had already drawn. A hexagon with a circle at its centre, and wires. I was amazed, but confused.. it was way too big!!! Then I started to think, how could it be so big? I then looked a lot at nature again, noticed how all life forms can repeat their shape, and are nearly all hexagon. I figured that the snowflake had simply repeated its shape. This was the actual machine, in great detail! I realsied how a fine gas could probably freeze close to the object, and everything made sense. The void of space is a complete row of these things, at their tiniest scale, and thus squashing all waves into fast waves. Now my advice is to just look at nature. I am still seeing hexagons. I was amazed to see that trees are hexagons. The most amazing thing however is that your door is a hexagon!!! The perspective squashes the bottom, and widens the top. You can measure it with a tape, but the tape will scale down at the same speed as the door, so you will get the right measurements for a rectangle. However I can show a diagram that proves that your door has leaning sides. It could only be rectangular if my first guess that the universe was made of squares was correct. But if the universe was made of squares, things would not scale down into the distance. They would remain the same size. For light would travel in a straight line straight to your eyes.

My theory as you can see is hard to accept. It goes beyond belief, and your brain does not like seeing hexagons, and so your own brain will fight my theory. However, I trust my own judgement, it has served me well in the past. It's up to you if you want to believe or not. But ask yourself this...

Why does intelligent life require water???

It's the only thing that can totally surround the snowflake machine.

Pincho Paxton

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3601&p=59425#p59425

hsandman wrote:The life expectancy was vicadons counter argument to my post that we (the human race) are getting screwed.

The one whih you haven't addressed, and can't address.

There is a lot of gray area when we are talking averages of a populations life expectancy.

Not when we are speaking about average life expectancy increae. it's unequivocally higher.

If vicodan was not a deluded, pedantic troll who can't stop using insults as arguments, I would have spent the time and dug up links and references etc. instead of just putting him on ignore.

No, you wouldn't have. You don't have anything of the sort,. You are simply an ignoramus who makes shit up and who doesn't have enough brainpower -- or enough intellectual honesty -- to look at reality. Instead, you must cherry-pick facts in order to suit your predetermined agenda. You are a liar, and you lost the argument, so now you huff and puff and pretend that, oh, if only i hadn't insulted you, you ewould have shown me how wrong i was!.

You had ample opportunity to do so, and you never did, because you can't. You have simply lied.

follow the corrolation between cancer and industrial development.

Follow the correlation between increased life expectancy and industrial development, or between decreased child mortality and industrial development... when you read this post -- which I know you will, because liars like you use the ignore feature only as a tool of manipulation.

Pincho Paxton wrote:Why does intelligent life require water???

Carbon-based life 'requires' water because water is a universal solvent, and provides a very flexible chemical context for both acidic and alkaline ionization. There is nothing inherent about water that makes it the only possible such foundation -- but it's simple, fits the bill, and is abundant in the universe.

Similarly, carbon is the base of life because it is incredibly versatile chemically, being able to ionize positively and negatively with equal ease, thus creating chemical bonds of wildly variable valency. In theory silicone can do something similar, but not as easily. This is why silicone organics have been the staple of science fiction for decades.

vicdan wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:Why does intelligent life require water???

Carbon-based life 'requires' water because water is a universal solvent, and provides a very flexible chemical context for both acidic and alkaline ionization. There is nothing inherent about water that makes it the only possible such foundation -- but it's simple, fits the bill, and is abundant in the universe.

Similarly, carbon is the base of life because it is incredibly versatile chemically, being able to ionize positively and negatively with equal ease, thus creating chemical bonds of wildly variable valency. In theory silicone can do something similar, but not as easily. This is why silicone organics have been the staple of science fiction for decades.

You have completely skipped out what acid, and alkaline ionization are. You have jumped the simple description, and gone for the scientific description. This is always a mistake, because science uses magic to explain itself. Basically you are saying that water can manipulate particles. Which just brings you back to my theory again. A way to manipulate all particles.

Vic:

Do you mean "silicon?"

Silicone is something rather different. :-P

hsandman wrote:follow the corrolation between cancer and industrial development.

But first remember the correlation between industrial development and life expectancy. And also note how the increased ability to diagnose cancer correlates with increased reported incidence of cancer.

Whoops! What happened here?! That's right, kids, when a larger portion of the population lives to old age, a much larger portion of the population will get cancer, because old people get more cancer. And when you are better able to diagnose cancer, you're going to find more cancers than you did before.

Funny how this works, ain't it?

Ahh, hexagon, like this?

Philosophaster wrote:

hsandman wrote:follow the corrolation between cancer and industrial development.

But first remember the correlation between industrial development and life expectancy. And also note how the increased ability to diagnose cancer correlates with increased reported incidence of cancer.

Whoops! What happened here?! That's right, kids, when a larger portion of the population lives to old age, a much larger portion of the population will get cancer, because old people get more cancer. And when you are better able to diagnose cancer, you're going to find more cancers than you did before.

Funny how this works, ain't it?

Hmm, good point. Take it that in poorer countries they don't live as long. Why is that? = no medicine? wars? Do you think if they lived to same age as developed country people they would show same rate of cancer development increase with age? Or was testing of old people done all over the earth ? Yep.. funny. I will give it some thought latter.

If the cancer is more aquired through the world and less geneticaly inherited then living longer and being exposed to carcinogens for longer might explain the corralation between age and cancer rate. It's tricky... statistics.

Pincho Paxton wrote:You have completely skipped out what acid, and alkaline ionization are.

I have assumed that someone asking questions about chemistry would have basic understanding of chemistry. Did you want the magic-and-crystals explanation?

You have jumped the simple description, and gone for the scientific description. This is always a mistake, because science uses magic to explain itself. Basically you are saying that water can manipulate particles.

No, i am not -- and if you are truly interested in the subject (as opposed to being interested in magic-and-crystals 'explanation'), then you should understand basic chemistry.

Why do people keep demanding that complex ideas be reduced to fifth-grade intellection level, and threaten to call it 'magic' otherwise? Understanding the world requires thinking and effort -- not the ersatz-thinking that is so popular around these parts, but the real thing. If you really care to understand the matter, study it.

Mind you, studying any science will require you to do some serious math. Math is the language of the universe. There is no magic substitution for mathematics.

vicdan wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:You have completely skipped out what acid, and alkaline ionization are.

I have assumed that someone asking questions about chemistry would have basic understanding of chemistry. Did you want the magic-and-crystals explanation?

You have jumped the simple description, and gone for the scientific description. This is always a mistake, because science uses magic to explain itself. Basically you are saying that water can manipulate particles.

No, i am not -- and if you are truly interested in the subject (as opposed to being interested in magic-and-crystals 'explanation'), then you should understand basic chemistry.

Why do people keep demanding that complex ideas be reduced to fifth-grade intellection level, and threaten to call it 'magic' otherwise? Understanding the world requires thinking and effort -- not the ersatz-thinking that is so popular around these parts, but the real thing. If you really care to understand the matter, study it.

Mind you, studying any science will require you to do some serious math. Math is the language of the universe. There is no magic substitution for mathematics.

I wasn't asking.. I was telling. Water is required to fill the bubble of sentience. Larger, harder materials cannot fill the cavity, or cannot move without falling apart. You have to strip everything down to what is possible without giving the universe total intelligence, and the universe surely does not have a mathematical mind, else it would be truly Godlike.

hsandman wrote:Ahh, hexagon, like this?

Yes, like that. Just enough atoms in each hexagon to remake the shape. If you imagine that you are standing in the fist hexagon looking outwards, you will be looking through a incrementing triangle of a hexagon pyramid. Therefore you get perspective, and you also get yet another crop circle.

vicdan wrote:Mind you, studying any science will require you to do some serious math. Math is the language of the universe. There is no magic substitution for mathematics.

Math is the language of the conceptual model of the empirical world that is called science.

Are you suggesting that there's anything beyond these models that we should care about, or can know?

people, join the 20th century at least... being a century behind philosophically is much better than being three centuries behind philosophically.

vicdan wrote:Are you suggesting that there's anything beyond these models that we should care about, or can know?

people, join the 20th century at least... being a century behind philosophically is much better than being three centuries behind philosophically.

There are things that I can explain, that can help science to get its mathematics right. For example, I have found the model that creates gravity. It can be used to re-examine Dark Matter. Dark Matter is not a particle, it is an energy level.

I can explain how an atom is linked at 4 points to 3 different tubes of substance, and an energy plasma. Positive/Negative rigidity, and energy, plus nodes of shape linking information.

You can examine a cup of tea all you like, and use your mathematic equations. But only a philosopher will ever find the spoon, the kettle, the milk carton, and the plumbing.

Pincho Paxton:

I think (?) you are trying to describe this? Geometric Universe.

You just need to be more coherent in your posts i guess.

I can't judge if this theory is right or wrong (we have vic for that),but the idea that universe is a product of pure geometry sounds intriguing. You need to learn math though, if you want to take that further.

I, believe in elegance through simplicity. There is nothing more elegant and simple than geometry imo. =)

(insert a token wise crack from vic lol)

Nature is predisposed toward simplicity, balance, and efficiency. Streams follow the path of least resistance. Trees grow only stout enough to keep from falling. When one thing goes up, something else comes down. In nature, nothing is overbuilt or more complex than necessary to accomplish its purpose.

People, on the other hand, are often too smart to keep it simple. Sometimes we make things more complicated, more grandiose, and less understandable the more we work on them. Despite this tendency, most people still have the inherent ability to recognize elegance, simplicity and truthfulness when they see it. Even though few can explain precisely why something is elegant, most can recognize that it is. That's why they appreciate a simple melody, the clean lines of a sports car, or the curl of a breaking wave. It's also why they recognize nonsense when they see it.

In developing our working philosophy, we have taken our cue from Nature–simplicity is better than complexity; efficiency is better than wastefulness; truthfulness is better than hyperbole.

hsandman is definitely correct in most things, whereas Vic doesn't really see the real problems behind the facade of 'progress' 'civilization' and the link. Vic doesn't really see the sacrifices made by most people in order for a few people to benefit. 'Civilisation' began with agriculture, which was one of the biggest disasters in human history. Agriculture actually increased famines and starvation, since they were relying on it, instead of remaining hunter-gatherers, who today are still thriving and not starving as most would believe, and who would be living just fine if we didn't keep pestering them. Agriculture was the beginning of slavery, the beginning of cities, when groups rounded up people from the outskirts as slaves, the beginning of 'kings and queens' of the few rich and powerful, literally stepping over the dead bodies of the underlings. Civilisation was the beginning of the 'division of labour' the beginning of widespread exploitation and privelages. Paleontology has actually showed that hunter gatherers were taller and lived longer than their counterparts in agriculture societies, due to the excessive physical labour they were forced to do to satisfy material greed. Civilisation was the beginning of mass warfare and regimented armies, the puppets of the few who are really in charge.

Fast forward thousands of years, and the same model still exists. Hunter gatherers work less than 40 hours per week, way less, they have more time for themselves, which is how it should be. Hunter gatherers have ALWAYS had more time for themselves, it is agriculture that has increased the workload for everyone. Hunter gatherers aren't forced to do shit jobs unlike today. In today's society, most people work shit jobs, while the few and powerful get everything. There's nothing 'fair' or 'efficient' about this. The division of labour is not progress, it's exploitation. Most of us aren't farmers, so we don't know the shit life they go through. Technology hasn't even made us work less, it seems the more technology we have the MORE we work. Farmers work well over 8 hours a day, say 13 hours, most of it physical labour. That's not a life, that's not progress. Farmers are sacrificed so WE are a bit more efficient ants, working 8 hours a day, in order for government officials to create their own default pensions and giant corporations swindle and literally, step over our dead bodies.

As for life expectancy and the infant mortality rate, yes it's going up, but to what end??? As Thoreau said about all this, "improved means for unimproved ends." Why does everyone think life expectancy is good in itself? most don't realize that the more ppl we have the harder and longer we have to work, that's hardly living. The more people we have, the more we have to rely on technology, what if somehow this technology fucks up? It's possible you know, what if we get a nuclear meltdown here and there? It's perfectly possible and probable.

As for 'economics,' Vic is stupid to naively worship the usual 'free market' rubbish. NAFTA??? forget it. NAFTA has led to more good jobs lost in North America, and sent overseas to China for wage slavery. NAFTA has destroyed local economies and made rich people richer. NAFTA doesn't benefit 'everyone,' I guess that's why they agreed on it behind closed doors, idiot. The modern global economy is a hoax, a swindle and a robbery. Just think what would happen if all the third world countries suddenly raised their wages to 14$ an hour (which is what it should be) lowered the working hours to 7, and raised health and environmental regulations, the conglomerate multinationals will likely collapse, will lose billions in profits, and so on and so on. Then will you see REALITY. Most technology, clothing, cars, and other 'conveniences' are made under wage slavery, hardly progress.

Then you have corporations who step over dead bodies in indirect ways: Big Pharma with its dangerous drugs for things that can be easily prevented and cures, dangerous cars which cost 50,000 lives per year on the highway and other accidents, probably by people going to work, work is nothing to die for on a highway accident. Then the office oligarchies and factory fascisms, what a shitty existence that is. Then there is rapid mainstream media, which has hardly done real news, and definitely hides the conspiracies that are going on. Then there is the soulless marketing and advertising, with its manipulation of people's insecurities. Then there is the military industrial complex, a billion dollar industry for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of killing people as brutal and as large scale as possible. So much for life expectancy. Then there's the FDA, which is doing the OPPOSITE of what it's supposed to, in order to get a fair share of corporate profits while putting millions of people at risk, hardly progress. Or American politics in general, boy that's a cess pool. The endless lobbying, lobbying, lobbying, and so on and so on, the bribes, the lowering of regulations, the fucking in the ass of the public and the whole world.

Vic is a real idiot when it comes to conspiracies. The Federal Reserve??? It's a PRIVATE CENTRAL BANKING CARTEL you jackass. It's not a government institution, it is subject to no audit, it is a private bank, which prints money out of nothing, and sells it with interest to the US government, and so the endless deficits and debaucherous exploitation of hard working Americans continues. The Skull and Bones? Doesn't worry you that elected officials are in an obscure satanic secret society that was originally called the Brotherhood of Death? What does it mean for elected officials to belong in societies that no one knows what the fuck they are?? What kind of an idiot trusts that? Let's see, the ongoing domination of American politics by Zionism, billions funded to the Zionist terrorist state of israel, with no Jewish foundation, or any foundation whatsoever. BTW, the Bank of England is also a private bank, the same people who control the federal reserve, ever heard of Rothschilds? They're also Zionists. Then you have Israel intentionally destroying the USS Liberty, with America accepting the 'apology' with no congressional investigation or hearing whatsoever.

Then you have the organisations that allow people to go through the power process, and achieve control and power over others, ie colleges, universities, corporations. It seems that careers are made by destroying the opportunities of others, then having power over them with these institutions of 'higher learning.' And what are these institutions' goals other than to continue the power process and to create 'technology' to benefit corporations and lower the privacy and freedom of everyone else? Most scientists' motives aren't for the 'benefit of humanity' most scientists crave fame, social status and power. Our universities award anyone who makes 'impressive' publications, not things of any value that lower the working hours or reveal the conspiracies. Take the case of Edward Teller, one minute he makes 'beneficial' nuclear power plants, the next he develops the hydrogen bomb!!!! One can just imagine him druelling when he's about to finish his diabolical invention, satisfied his base instincts by making something capable of obliterating people. Same with Oppenheimer, who later regrets doing it, what the fuck does he expect??? "Hmm I'll finish making it so I'm famous, then I'll regret it."

It seems that large powerful organisations are taking over every aspect of our lives, and making us work harder and longer and shittier jobs for the benefit of a few, it's always been like that. 8 hours is worthless if we can't enjoy it with our 'life expectancy.'