contention

The prevalence of a spirit of contention amongst a people is a certain sign of deadness with respect to the things of religion. When men's spirits are hot with contention, they are cold to religion. - Jonathan Edwards “The Book of Mormon does not supplant the Bible. It expands, extends, clarifies, and amplifies our knowledge of the Savior. Surely, this second witness should be cause for great rejoicing by all Christians.” - Joseph B. Wirthlin

Thursday, July 18, 2024

Learn from everyone

 

We can learn something from everyone. I invite you to adopt the mindset that you can be taught by anyone. If we are willing and humble, the Lord will give us more opportunities to learn and grow.

https://x.com/RonaldARasband/status/1813941500994281691

Wednesday, July 17, 2024

Political parallels

Food for thought: Does the M2C/SITH network (formerly known as the M2C/SITH citation cartel) resemble the modern Democrat party? 

Open-minded people who want to make informed decisions are coming to realize that M2C/SITH persists because of apathetic deference to the credentialed class, which utilizes sophistry, censorship, and misinformation to prop up their narratives.

We're fine with people believing whatever they want, but we like it best when people make fully informed decisions, which requires all sides to pursue clarity, charity and understanding by applying the FAITH model of analysis.

_____

Democrat party today:

Ed Krassenstein
@EdKrassen
Hot Take: Elon Musk has become a Republican out of spite for Joe Biden not respecting Tesla enough.


It’s not a bad take at all from 2022! But I think we can and should now build upon it and take it much further in 2024. The new version of the Democratic Party, together with its supportive media and subservient universities are in the process of embittering and radicalizing *EVERY* single last US dissenter. Literally everyone who dissents from the party narratives is coming to despise the leadership of the party and its media. Name me the independent Democratic Party dissenters, who are huge fans of the Biden/Harris ticket. They don’t exist. They aren’t real. Here’s why. Tell me if you recognize the following playbook: “That seems odd.” —->Conspiracy Theorist! “I’m thinking of starting my own newsletter/podcast/channel to discuss and explore what I don’t see discussed in mainstream media and academe.” —-> Grifter!! Narcissist! “Trump is actually making kind of an effective point.” —-> Cancelled! “I actually looked at the data and primary sources which don’t say exactly what you are claiming.” ——> Ha ha. Dunning-Kruger! “I don’t know that I fully agree with that.” —-> Far Right extremist! “I have a different take on that.” —-> Charlatan. Total charlatan. “There is weirdly an interesting parallel there between two different points.” ——> Stay in your lane! “This DEI agenda seems pretty extreme in a bunch of places.” ——-> Bigot! Etc. —————— I have watched the White House invite relatively random ‘influencers’ for briefings. But no one who actually has their own ideas. No one at all. The party is increasingly about one thing: “Let us think for you. Let us be your eyes and your ears. Make our new words and phrases into your language. Let our talking point memos be your dinner table conversation perspectives. Surrender.” And everyone with a soul or a dissenting idea in their head starts looking rightwards whether or not they have ANY INTEREST at all in Republican ideas. I don’t look to the Republican Party for ideas or platform planks. I think only about one thing: “Can I afford to think for myself here?” Quite honestly, I can’t think around the true believers in the Democratic Party. My brain doesn’t work around this totalitarian gaslighting. And I assure you this is why Joe Biden is going to lose as this continues: you cannot gaslight an entire nation of free people into hating each other this completely for this long. Biden has dementia and cognitive loss. He has for some time. Harris is not fit to command the army. I didn’t create that. I merely observed it. For YEARS. But pretending that *everyone* who sees a buck naked emperor is a charlatan is no longer working very well. The emperor is naked and has been for some time. He has been protected by a party leadership that needs to be retired. The Democratic Party leadership is sending almost all smart people fleeing for no other reason than that smart free people want to retain the right to dissent without character assasination. Sooner or later, we all feel like Elon does when shat upon. Everyone. Full stop. πŸ™
Quote


Monday, July 8, 2024

How a consensus is reached

 

The “scientific consensus” talking point was succinctly dismantled by Dr. Judith Curry in her interview with John Stossel back in October. 𝗝𝗼𝗡𝗻 π—¦π˜π—Όπ˜€π˜€π—²π—Ή: “The overwhelming scientific consensus. That’s what people still believe.” 𝗗𝗿. π—π˜‚π—±π—Άπ˜π—΅ π—–π˜‚π—Ώπ—Ώπ˜†: “. . . when you talk about ‘scientific consensus,’ like the Earth orbits the sun, you don’t need to say ‘There’s a consensus that the Earth orbits the sun,’ it’s a well-known fact. When you’re talking about consensus, it’s usually on a topic where there is disagreement, and a government has asked a group to come to some sort of an agreement on what’s what. You see it in science, you see it in. . . medical boards. . . So, it’s a manufactured consensus. It’s a consensus of scientists, which is different than a scientific consensus. . .” Dr. Curry goes on to explain that there is no consensus on the most contentious issues of climate change, such as extent of human contribution and the impacts. 𝗗𝗿. π—π˜‚π—±π—Άπ˜π—΅ π—–π˜‚π—Ώπ—Ώπ˜†: “. . . there’s a true scientific consensus on very little of this, you know that, • The temperatures have been increasing for over a hundred years. • That burning of fossil fuels emits CO₂ into the atmosphere. • And, CO₂ has a radiation spectrum that sort of keeps the Earth’s surface warm, all other things being equal. Beyond that, there’s no real big consensus on anything. The most consequential issues we don’t have a consensus on: • How much of the recent warming is caused by fossil fuels? We still don’t know. • Is fossil fuel and is warming dangerous? This is the weakest part of the argument. There’s no agreement as to whether warming is dangerous.”