People have died because of this lunatic. Many more people will die.
His Wikipedia page says this: Since 2005, Kennedy has promoted vaccine misinformation and public-health conspiracy theories, including the chemtrail conspiracy theory, HIV/AIDS denialism, and the scientifically disproved claim of a causal link between vaccines and autism. He has drawn criticism for fueling vaccine hesitancy amid a social climate that gave rise to the deadly measles outbreaks in Samoa and Tonga. link
He is a tinfoil hat wearing nut job. Which explains why you're a fan. And you love it when government policy kills people. As opposed to saving people, which you hate.
That is why king donald is dismantling FEMA. Instead of helping people during and after disasters, Turds like you like to sit back and laugh as people die.
“Afraid his Big Pharma/Big Agra stock and retirement fund values will decline”...
This is rhetorical sleight-of-hand...
•It dodges accountability by implying your motives are selfish. •It projects complicity onto you, rather than addressing Kennedy’s record. •It’s a non sequitur, designed to derail the conversation.
The Past isn't an absolute? You can travel back to it? Reverse the Arrow of Time? It had 'limiting' origins at the last Big Bang? The origin of Life? The last human record of it? Your birth? Who knew?
The Past. The Many. The Future. The One. Who's to say what is "absolute"? What is the Part, and what the Whole? What is absolute to the Part. What is Absolute to the Whole. Dualities offering perspectives from which to View Reality.
But I forgot. You already know the "Absolute" Truth. Even Plato's Socrates of "Parmenides" fame wasn't sure. His conclusion was merely that "if One is not, then Nothing is."
Reinforced in "Cratylus"... SOCRATES: Nor yet can they be known by any one; for at the moment that the observer approaches, then they become other and of another nature, so that you cannot get any further in knowing their nature or state, for you cannot know that which has no state.
CRATYLUS: True.
SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say, Cratylus, that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge too cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide and exist. But if the very nature of knowledge changes, at the time when the change occurs there will be no knowledge; and if the transition is always going on, there will always be no knowledge, and, according to this view, there will be no one to know and nothing to be known: but if that which knows and that which is known exists ever, and the beautiful and the good and every other thing also exist, then I do not think that they can resemble a process or flux, as we were just now supposing. Whether there is this eternal nature in things, or whether the truth is what Heracleitus and his followers and many others say, is a question hard to determine; and no man of sense will like to put himself or the education of his mind in the power of names: neither will he so far trust names or the givers of names as to be confident in any knowledge which condemns himself and other existences to an unhealthy state of unreality; he will not believe that all things leak like a pot, or imagine that the world is a man who has a running at the nose. This may be true, Cratylus, but is also very likely to be untrue; and therefore I would not have you be too easily persuaded of it. Reflect well and like a man, and do not easily accept such a doctrine; for you are young and of an age to learn. And when you have found the truth, come and tell me.
CRATYLUS: I will do as you say, though I can assure you, Socrates, that I have been considering the matter already, and the result of a great deal of trouble and consideration is that I incline to Heracleitus.
SOCRATES: Then, another day, my friend, when you come back, you shall give me a lesson; but at present, go into the country, as you are intending, and Hermogenes shall set you on your way.
CRATYLUS: Very good, Socrates; I hope, however, that you will continue to think about these things yourself.
I, therefore, lay no claims to Knowledge... only to Right Opinion. Although I've never been to Larisa, I'm pretty sure I can get there. With a five sigma certainty, at least. ;)
Five-sigma certainty refers to a standard of extreme statistical confidence, primarily used in particle physics, that signifies a result is about 99.9999% likely to be a real discovery and not just a random statistical fluke. It translates to a roughly one-in-3.5-million chance that the observed data is a statistical anomaly rather than a genuine new phenomenon. This threshold is required to declare a discovery of a new particle or effect, as it helps to account for the large number of data points and potential systematic uncertainties in experiments.
But then again, I appreciate duality... from Google AI: The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics stating that you cannot simultaneously know certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, such as its position and momentum, with perfect accuracy. The more precisely one property is known, the less precisely the other can be known. This is not a limitation of measurement devices but an inherent property arising from the wave-like nature of quantum particles, where a more spread-out wave (less certain position) corresponds to a more defined wavelength (more certain momentum), and vice versa. Key Aspects Inherent Property: The uncertainty is not due to faulty equipment or measurement errors but is a fundamental limit built into the fabric of the universe at the quantum level. Wave-Particle Duality: The principle is a direct consequence of the wave-like nature of quantum particles. A particle with a precisely defined position would be like a very narrow pulse (like a short wave), making its wavelength (and thus momentum) very uncertain. Conversely, a particle with a very defined wavelength would be spread out, making its exact position unknown.
...but the absence of an absolute? There's got to be an absolute everything existing on both sides of the "Zero Point"... where the dualities of Matter and Energy in all their possible forms reside. And absolutes reduce themselves to "relative" properties, from which the "laws" of physics postulated, and I can predict pasts, presents, and futures with 5 sigma "certainties".
Minus: The Past isn't an absolute? You can travel back to it? Reverse the Arrow of Time?
Another Minus FJ idiotic comment. There have never been any non fiction books that disagree about historical events? There shouldn't be, if the past being known is an absolute.
Via Copilot...
🧪 Your Analysis Holds:
“If history was an absolute, there would be no historical tomes published that disagree with one another.”
Exactly. The existence of the past is one thing. The meaning of it is another. Absolutes in metaphysics don’t translate neatly into epistemology or historiography. -FJ conflates ontological fixity (the past happened) with epistemological certainty (we know exactly what happened and what it means). That’s a philosophical sleight of hand.
19 comments:
People have died because of this lunatic. Many more people will die.
His Wikipedia page says this: Since 2005, Kennedy has promoted vaccine misinformation and public-health conspiracy theories, including the chemtrail conspiracy theory, HIV/AIDS denialism, and the scientifically disproved claim of a causal link between vaccines and autism. He has drawn criticism for fueling vaccine hesitancy amid a social climate that gave rise to the deadly measles outbreaks in Samoa and Tonga. link
He is a tinfoil hat wearing nut job. Which explains why you're a fan. And you love it when government policy kills people. As opposed to saving people, which you hate.
That is why king donald is dismantling FEMA. Instead of helping people during and after disasters, Turds like you like to sit back and laugh as people die.
^^Afraid his Big Pharma/ Big Agra stock and retirement fund values will decline^^
I'll LMAO for ya when your Fuhrer Genius destroys your financial future.
Hey DeadHesd , if you can’t say
anything truthful then shut your Lying mouth
Isn’t it Funny how the Leftist idiots loved RFK Jr. when he was a Democrat, and they hate him now !
Bullshit!
I've NEVER liked the ignorant heroine addict who kept journals on the women he f**ked.
Unlike MAGAts who have zero ethics or morals apparently.
Via Copilot...
🧩 Joe Conservative’s Reply.
“Afraid his Big Pharma/Big Agra stock and retirement fund values will decline”...
This is rhetorical sleight-of-hand...
•It dodges accountability by implying your motives are selfish.
•It projects complicity onto you, rather than addressing Kennedy’s record.
•It’s a non sequitur, designed to derail the conversation.
[end]
The dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency. Gold IS.
They're all verba non acta, Anon.
Not all. The only absolute is that there are no absolutes.
Other than space itself, and, the only time that exists is the now.
You never see the future other than from the perspective of the past. Which is always gone for good.
That's false. Also another non sequitur. Are you ok? Aren't family members checking in on you?
The Past isn't an absolute? You can travel back to it? Reverse the Arrow of Time? It had 'limiting' origins at the last Big Bang? The origin of Life? The last human record of it? Your birth? Who knew?
The Past. The Many. The Future. The One. Who's to say what is "absolute"? What is the Part, and what the Whole? What is absolute to the Part. What is Absolute to the Whole. Dualities offering perspectives from which to View Reality.
But I forgot. You already know the "Absolute" Truth. Even Plato's Socrates of "Parmenides" fame wasn't sure. His conclusion was merely that "if One is not, then Nothing is."
Reinforced in "Cratylus"...
SOCRATES: Nor yet can they be known by any one; for at the moment that the observer approaches, then they become other and of another nature, so that you cannot get any further in knowing their nature or state, for you cannot know that which has no state.
CRATYLUS: True.
SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say, Cratylus, that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge too cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide and exist. But if the very nature of knowledge changes, at the time when the change occurs there will be no knowledge; and if the transition is always going on, there will always be no knowledge, and, according to this view, there will be no one to know and nothing to be known: but if that which knows and that which is known exists ever, and the beautiful and the good and every other thing also exist, then I do not think that they can resemble a process or flux, as we were just now supposing. Whether there is this eternal nature in things, or whether the truth is what Heracleitus and his followers and many others say, is a question hard to determine; and no man of sense will like to put himself or the education of his mind in the power of names: neither will he so far trust names or the givers of names as to be confident in any knowledge which condemns himself and other existences to an unhealthy state of unreality; he will not believe that all things leak like a pot, or imagine that the world is a man who has a running at the nose. This may be true, Cratylus, but is also very likely to be untrue; and therefore I would not have you be too easily persuaded of it. Reflect well and like a man, and do not easily accept such a doctrine; for you are young and of an age to learn. And when you have found the truth, come and tell me.
CRATYLUS: I will do as you say, though I can assure you, Socrates, that I have been considering the matter already, and the result of a great deal of trouble and consideration is that I incline to Heracleitus.
SOCRATES: Then, another day, my friend, when you come back, you shall give me a lesson; but at present, go into the country, as you are intending, and Hermogenes shall set you on your way.
CRATYLUS: Very good, Socrates; I hope, however, that you will continue to think about these things yourself.
I, therefore, lay no claims to Knowledge... only to Right Opinion. Although I've never been to Larisa, I'm pretty sure I can get there. With a five sigma certainty, at least. ;)
Five-sigma certainty refers to a standard of extreme statistical confidence, primarily used in particle physics, that signifies a result is about 99.9999% likely to be a real discovery and not just a random statistical fluke. It translates to a roughly one-in-3.5-million chance that the observed data is a statistical anomaly rather than a genuine new phenomenon. This threshold is required to declare a discovery of a new particle or effect, as it helps to account for the large number of data points and potential systematic uncertainties in experiments.
But then again, I appreciate duality...
from Google AI:
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics stating that you cannot simultaneously know certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, such as its position and momentum, with perfect accuracy. The more precisely one property is known, the less precisely the other can be known. This is not a limitation of measurement devices but an inherent property arising from the wave-like nature of quantum particles, where a more spread-out wave (less certain position) corresponds to a more defined wavelength (more certain momentum), and vice versa.
Key Aspects
Inherent Property:
The uncertainty is not due to faulty equipment or measurement errors but is a fundamental limit built into the fabric of the universe at the quantum level.
Wave-Particle Duality:
The principle is a direct consequence of the wave-like nature of quantum particles. A particle with a precisely defined position would be like a very narrow pulse (like a short wave), making its wavelength (and thus momentum) very uncertain. Conversely, a particle with a very defined wavelength would be spread out, making its exact position unknown.
Like I said, the Certainty of Absolutes... something beyond MY ken. And Dialectics of Absolutes like Plato's "Parmenids"? Foggedabbouddit
...but the absence of an absolute? There's got to be an absolute everything existing on both sides of the "Zero Point"... where the dualities of Matter and Energy in all their possible forms reside. And absolutes reduce themselves to "relative" properties, from which the "laws" of physics postulated, and I can predict pasts, presents, and futures with 5 sigma "certainties".
Minus: The Past isn't an absolute? You can travel back to it? Reverse the Arrow of Time?
Another Minus FJ idiotic comment. There have never been any non fiction books that disagree about historical events? There shouldn't be, if the past being known is an absolute.
Via Copilot...
🧪 Your Analysis Holds:
“If history was an absolute, there would be no historical tomes published that disagree with one another.”
Exactly. The existence of the past is one thing. The meaning of it is another. Absolutes in metaphysics don’t translate neatly into epistemology or historiography. -FJ conflates ontological fixity (the past happened) with epistemological certainty (we know exactly what happened and what it means). That’s a philosophical sleight of hand.
[end]
^^Properties of scalars in Conformal Field Theory (CFT).^^
Post a Comment