Tuesday, April 28, 2015

why are knuckle-draggers distorting the mayor's words and outright lying?

investors |  However angry people might be, we're still a nation of laws. The legal system has to function for justice to be done. Rioting is a breakdown of public order that can ruin neighborhoods, communities and entire cities.

That's why Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake's comments are truly astounding. Not only did she not tell those who were demonstrating to wait until all the facts were in, she seemed to encourage the worst elements among them to do violence.

In a press conference Sunday, Rawlings-Blake said, "I ... instructed (the police) to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. ... We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that."

"Space" to rob, loot and commit arson? Even after 35 people were arrested and six police officers injured during the protests? It was an extraordinarily inflammatory comment.

Meanwhile, Baltimore police report "credible information" that an alliance of gangs has formed to "take out" cops — possible fallout from the mayor's remarks.

It has been claimed that this violence was all the handiwork of "outsiders." "The Baltimore Police Department believes that outside agitators continue to be the instigators behind acts of violence and destruction," Police Commissioner Anthony W. Batts told the media.

It wasn't clearly worded on her part. She should have said "However by giving those peaceful protesters the space and protection to protest, we also gave those who wished to destroy the space to do so." She learned the unfortunate lesson that right-wing whackjobs will selectively cut a soundbite out of context, and use it to promote the angle they desire.


CNu said...

Bofa y'all need to read Kahneman. http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=kahneman

Arnach said so, and yes, it is that dope.


Alphabets symbolize sounds and are processed by System 1 after we teach it how to read. System 2, the great metaphier, about which religionists uncritically believe so much hooey and scientists are learning more every day - may itself be comprised of little more than language - the great something for which a phonetic visual representation was "constructed" http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=language+before+consciousness

CNu said...

Except as an oppositional concept to make a point, I find the terms
"Scientist," and "Religionist," pretty useless in this context. Just an
emotional symbol to get the juices flowing.Do tell?

CNu said...

You quoted Dr. Jablonka EJ: I am a geneticist. I did a PhD in genetics and
molecular biology; in fact, on DNA methylation and chromatin structure.
Before that, I did a Masters thesis in microbiology. At the same time, I
was deeply interested in philosophy of biology. While I was doing a PhD
in genetics, I was also writing papers for philosophy of biology
journals. I thought that I should combine the two because theoretical
biology and evolutionary biology need a very strong conceptual basis. I
ended up being in some kind of twilight zone between the two things. For
me it was a productive combination.She's a scientist applying her training and insights to the philosophy of science.

Clearly, when the evolutionist wonders why is the sacred, sacredWe don't.http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2008/10/evolutionary-roots-of-base.html We know and accept that the stupid are the stupid and that wattle ethology is predicated on aggregating into collective security clubs as an evolutionarily stable strategy. The CSC as ESS both ensures that the stupid trait will be dominant within-group and that the group is less likely to be invaded by other more cognitively advanced predators/parasites.

CNu said...

You got an example, post it up. Otherwise, go suck an Alex Challenge Pack http://store.infowars.com/-Infowars-Life_c_79.html?ims=nxktz

Constructive_Feedback said...


In your attempt to be "Cutting Edge", from a different angle. And not traveling 'the well worn path" - you manage to take the "Defensive Disposition" that I see in so many other people who:

* Report the police throwing rocks
* The media calling the protesters "Looters"
* How the White Kids at the University Of Kentucky weren't slammed as much
* The mayor's words are being taken out of context.


How many people in "Broadway East" will now continue to be a risk to others in their community because the Community Center, that was to provide HIV Testing has now been burned to the ground? $16 million down the drain.

If the "Southern Baptist Church" is charged heightened insurance rates upon reconstruction AND THEN "The Atlantic" writes a story entitled: "INSURANCE COMPANIES - From Underwriting Enslaved Human Beings To Charging Higher Rates In The Inner City" - will you push back, providing additional context?

CNu said...

Nah Feed. I hopped into a motor pool vehicle y'day morning ~11:00 only to hear Alex Jones pretending that the mayor had authorized property destruction. He claimed to have gotten it off Drudge. Well, knowing that infowars and drudge, along with SBPDL, Amren, and WND comprise BD's primary talking point sources, I figured I'd get out ahead of him, Jesse Lee, "pastor" Manning, or any other coonservative sidekick who might drive by pretending there's a shred of credibility in that trivially falsifiable claim. .

ken said...

Yes, I fully understand I quoted a scientist. And she offered a theory and a proposition to expand the realm of evolution. And it will be interesting for science to find that behavior does change the person materially, that the spiritual practice of the person does effect himself materially. To many of those of the faith, we have assumed this, as she also did, but I suppose for those who are materialist this is somewhat groundbreaking, or worrisome. This one article thought of it this way.


"Yet the mere mention of the EES often evokes an emotional, even hostile, reaction among evolutionary biologists. Too often, vital discussions descend into acrimony, with accusations of muddle or misrepresentation. Perhaps haunted by the spectre of intelligent design, evolutionary biologists wish to show a united front to those hostile to science. Some might fear that they will receive less funding and recognition if outsiders — such as physiologists or developmental biologists — flood into their field."
(I take exception that intelligent design scientist are hostile to science, but I get the drift.)

"We know and accept that the stupid are the stupid and that wattle ethology is predicated on aggregating into collective security clubs as an evolutionarily stable strategy." or from your link, to be more pointed..."Here's a question for you. Why hasn't natural selection driven the religious right to extinction?" Of course this guy is not empirically taking a look at the scientific answer to his question one bit? There's of course simple logic to his answer which is what the two in the conversation posted on for the anchor of this thread alluded to:


The evolutionist, in the conversation you posted here understand the facts of the Heritage piece, but it doesn't make them think we should promote more thoughts of the sacred, but instead, if they can figure out what makes the stupid more motivated with their stupid sacred text to be better educated, more stable families, more satisfied with life, healthier, and more giving and financially better off, etc..; The evolutionist can finally replace the stupid's religion with something more compatible with the interpretations of their own findings.

Vic78 said...

It doesn't even make sense to believe the city's mayor would make a public statement like that. Tea billies stopped making sense a long time ago. I think Big Dawn should think about leaving the tribe that rubs shit in its hair. All membership does is reaffirm the worldview and take your money. Seeing how Dawn goes on about fuzlims and iq65 makes me think he doesn't have any friends. Lol, his only comfort in life is Alex Jones and Drudge. Then, he comes here for y'all to put him down. I bet you'll laugh if you saw him in person.

DD said...

You had that Myers Briggs stuff up a while back--I'm going to hazard a guess that you peg the meter as a "J" instead of a "P."

Pegging the teams as Scientists=uniform block for progress and species uplift, Religionists=uniform block for parasitic anti-progress.

I don't think either group is remotely a homogenous block. Reductive dehumanization/enemy status for others is very human, but not really helpful except at confirming your own biases.

My main argument with the (bogeyman) Scientist clique is this-- they all still serve some emotional/moral framework, but it's justified as being "better," due to it's basis in science. But science is amoral! It's a fake backing for any action. Good science by definition doesn't decide what's right and wrong, only what is. Taking any action based on the science is a completely arbitrary moral construct--it has no more weight (and I'd say less) than a Religionist viewpoint, since that at least the Religionists don't personally assume agency over their views--they ascribe them to a higher power which doesn't always align with their personal desires.

Science can say "Global Warming is Real." It can describe the consequences. What it can't do is say "this is the right thing to do." That's morality pretending it's better than Religionism (?) because it has a degree.

BigDonOne said...

Avoiding police brutality is just common sense.
Even Chris Rock gets it... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2plo4FOgIU

CNu said...

Reductive dehumanization/enemy status for others is very human, but not really helpful except at confirming your own biases.

rotflmbao...., "your species", "pan-troglodytic deuterostems", "these humans", "broken machines", "6.5 Billion of you gotta go, gotta go, gotta go" confirming my biases.....,TA LOCO?!?!?!

Real religion is the basis for both science and civilization. It is nothing less than the science of consciousness and the systematic realization of man's possible psychological development - show and prove.

Anything explicitly less than that is pan-troglodytic gibberish unfit for anything aspiring to the term "human".

At the very least, science requires intellect, effort, and commitment to basic evidentiary standards. It's a step on the road leading to humanity. Those professing religion absent science are mere slaves.

DD said...

Cool, glad we agree.

ken said...

do you see my reply in your filter? Not sure why that one got deleted.

Vic78 said...

I think it's something with blogspot. I've had that problem on a few sites.

Constructive_Feedback said...


I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself from being a "Stalker Of Bill O'Reilly".

WHAT WAS YOUR OPINION when you saw a $16 million Community Center developed by a BLACK CHURCH, being torched in the name of "Social Justice"?

Can you articulate to us all WHY this act does not belong in the annals of "Black History" right beside the Torching Of Tulsa Oklahoma, driven by the same HATRED OF BLACK PEOPLE'S PROGRESS?

CNu said...

lol, blogger doesn't control the comments, merely reflects them. I think it's y'alls ashy-assed ancient email aliases. yahoo.com and juno.com? Why not just AOL?


Update these ratchet email aliases to gmail - and welcome to the 21st century!

ken said...

Here is the religious writing a letter to the religious. I have a strong suspicion you would disagree with this, but thought you might like to take a look at a another perspective.


makheru bradley said...

Question Bro. Feed. Who are you suggesting set the massive fire that destroyed this project 3.2 miles from the epicenter of the rebellion? Just wondering why drew an analogy to Greenwood?

Vic78 said...

"I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself from..."

You come up with some crazy shit. So, you're Black Jesus now?


BigDonOne said...

BD cannot believe Subrealism actually posted a photo of several black folks beneath a caption containing the term "knuckle-draggers"....

arnach said...

Slapped down, BD attempts to fight back with a subreal BURN!

Constructive_Feedback said...



CNu said...

Beisner's got a little cutie working the phones for him there. Aside from that, it's a lame hustle by an unqualified hustler with an unrelated "Dr." slapped in front of his name in order to impress the rubes. Scottish history indeed.

This is decidedly not an example of the religious writing to the religious. This is an example of a pompous crumb-hustling pimp, scrounging contributions from corporate sponsors (or his little cutie doing that on his behalf) and writing overlong gassy nonsense to personages whose flunkies don't even bother to read this crap, mainly for the "benefit" of those selfsame rubes who're impressed with that "Dr." slapped in front of his name. Dale put up an example of the religious exercising stewardship over their environment. http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2015/04/compulsory-community-labour-non.html Everything else is mendacious conversation...,

CNu said...

I knew I should have just crushed your ham-fisted attempt at cognitive infiltration here. Short and sweet. What made the texts "sacred" in the first place is that they emanated from and referred to a state of shared entheogenic revelation. http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=allegro

Stripped of that collective entheogenic revelation, they're just so much gibberish revered by people dumb enough to be shepherded into a consensus hallucination by middling conmen and hustlers of the dumb and superstitious. As the entheogenic sacrament is pulled out from under the wrecking ball of murderously coercive prohibition - we'll soon witness (easily within my lifetime) a renaissance of collective revelatory experience and a renewed sacralization of matters evolved millenia and quantum leaps beyond the primitive goatherds plucking mushrooms out of livestock shit and tripping balls in antiquity.

Honestly Not Sure How A Turd Like This Calls Itself A Scholar.....,

chronicle  |   It is not surprising for a boss to think that employees should avoid saying things in public that might damage the organiz...