Defining ACTUAL Intelligence

What he said.

I've been considering that expression "history repeats itself" and have come to realize that it's not historical events recurring, the real cause or phenomenon is that "people never change". People today are the same as people 100 years ago or 1000 years ago. That's why people today make the same short-sighted choices as they did in the past.

Only if they don't know better. We have TV and movies which can teach us the mistakes not to make, but dems want to take that away.

If you're a leftist, history is yours to change and know absolutely nothing about so you can make the same mistakes again and call intelligent people racist for knowing better.

smart people learn from THEIR mistakes...REALLY smart people...learn from other's mistakes...and the absolutely dumb keep making the same mistakes over and over...

true

https://comunistmanifesto101.blogspot.com/2019/07/metaphors-and-memes-why-left-is.html
Metaphors and MEME's ....Why the Left is Triggered when We the People USE them
This is like this is like that is one of the primary ways that we make sense of new entities. We compare them to things with which we are familiar, from our environment, our culture, our identities. Aristotle wrote that metaphor ‘has clarity and sweetness and strangeness’, adding:

It is a great thing, indeed, to make a proper use of the poetical forms, as also of compounds and strange words. But the greatest thing by far is to be a master of metaphor. It is the one thing that cannot be learnt from others; and it is also a sign of genius, since a good metaphor implies an intuitive perception of the similarity in dissimilars.

LMAO this is a left-wing meme condemning the rightoids who are banning books and history, and it's gotten to the front page of politics because rightoids are so thick and full of projection!

banning books in public schools that allow pornographic content doesn’t seem so radical to me. And if you don’t believe me, there’s stuff you can look up on that. It exists.
And the left has revised history, so in a way, your side is banning history by outright lying about it.
And CRT should not be taught to kids. All it does is cause racial tension in young children that would not exist otherwise. I didn’t give a flying frick if people were white or black or asian as a kid, and I never wanted to think of anyone that way. I wanted to befriend everyone. You might end up creating the racism you are trying so desperately to end even earlier than it usually would start. Children do not need that stuff shoved in their face. Let six year olds be innocent.

Yeah, none of that's a thing. You need to return to reality.

No, you need to see reality. This crap isn’t hard to find. Men trying to teach small children while wearing inhumanly sized prosthetic b**bs, teachers encouraging children to identify as different genders behind their parents’ backs (and claiming the children in the class as their own), the list goes on and on. Would you like me to go back further than the past two months?
Your little short “you’re false” rebuttals contain no details, no facts, only “I don’t believe you.” Only it’s hilarious to people who argue from what they’ve seen and not just from what people would have them believe.

You don't live in reality.

No you don't.

"Children do not need that stuff shoved in their face. Let six year olds be innocent."

And when Christians shove their religion into the faces of six year olds?

Religion isn’t a bodily self-destructive process that can never be reversed if you regret it later. Religion isn’t an addictive ****hub (which books and TV shows are trying so hard to emulate nowadays). Religion doesn’t shove tension in kids based entirely on race (and if it does, that’s something wrong with the adults in that community, not the religion). Religion doesn’t intentionally and sneakily pit children against their own parents (as some schools have been busted doing, and as China did with Mao).

Equating these two is like equating onions to a nuclear bomb. They are not similar.

Also, by this logic, should parents just not teach children anything and keep their thoughts to themselves? Should you shove your evolution into your children? Because I would say if you really believe that, then you should make sure your education system is doing the same thing so that your child actually develops their own opinions. Because what goes on in today’s society is that any parent who doesn’t tell their child what they think is right, that child will just blindly believe in whatever the school system teaches. Parents could be guilty of this, too. It’s hard to find a reasonable solution in this world because this generation is having a war over our children’s minds. I think children should be able to come to their own conclusions but they should be trained critical thought first because children are more likely to believe what they want is true.

"Religion isn’t a bodily self-destructive process that can never be reversed if you regret it later"

Neither are books which contain content you don't agree with

"Religion isn’t an addictive"

It can be very addictive

"****hub"

I don't know what that means

"Religion doesn’t shove tension in kids based entirely on race"

That doesn't mean it isn't harmful. As far as I'm concerned, telling a little kid that they'll go to Hell forever if they don't accept Jesus as their savior is no different than telling them that if they don't clean their room you'll put their hand onto a hot stove and burn them. It's abuse.

"Religion doesn’t intentionally and sneakily pit children against their own parents"

Sometimes it does

"Equating these two is like equating onions to a nuclear bomb. They are not similar."

I agree, they aren't. Teaching kids to fight against racism is very different than hateful, divisive religions.

"Should you shove your evolution into your children?"

Evolution is a real thing. It doesn't matter if you understand it or not.

"It’s hard to find a reasonable solution in this world because this generation is having a war over our children’s minds"

And the side that has facts and logic should be the side that wins

"I think children should be able to come to their own conclusions but they should be trained critical thought first because children are more likely to believe what they want is true"

And that goes right back to my original statement. That is why many Christians push their religion onto kids as young as possible, before they're at the age where they can really think for themselves.

Which describes all religious books. But I was specifically referring to books encouraging transgender ideology or containing outright porn, while being meant for kids.

Only if you have hope. And it doesn’t compel people like porn or addictive drugs do.

****hub is pornhub, a pornographic website which i was trying not to mention by name on a site full of kids.

No, they’re not the same because one isn’t done by adults and one is. Hell isn’t up to us. Putting a child on a hot stove is adults abusing children because they’re not getting their way. Which believe me, I’ve had quite enough of being on the receiving end of that whole crappy mentality. But if hell is indeed real, then the cruelty from the parents would be not to warn their children about it. They’re doing a service teaching them about it. Your problem is with God.

Only if the parents are abusive to them specifically for their religion. And you’ll find the most mature Christian kids don’t think of it as “them vs their parents”, but “their parents vs Satan.”

Microevolution is. Macroevolution is nonsense and is unscientific. It’s unproven, unseen, and 100% based on extrapolations that took off only because of the Enlightenment mindset. I understand evolution all right, that’s why I think it’s a bunch of hogwash.
And as far as I’m concerned, God is a real thing, and it doesn’t matter if you understand Him or not.

Yeah, and it’s not the side that tries to win arguments by bullying, yelling, revenge-hate, and over-expression of feelings (and I can’t believe I’m saying this). This generation can’t critically think, so why on earth would you think the zeitgeist would be on the side of facts and logic? They’re easily manipulated by feelings and the desire to be good without them having really any reason to be good in the world.

Actually the same could be said for the opposite side. Studies have been done showing that children prefer explanations depicting a created earth than the nonsense that the Big Bang is, but they have to have both ideas presented to them. Why do you think people bullied creationism out of public schools? And I don’t mean teaching it exclusively. I mean they bullied it out of being taught alongside evolution so children could draw their own conclusions. Some psychologists that have done these studies believe that children would believe in some sort of God if they raised themselves.

"transgender ideology" is a scare phrase used by people who don't want any mention of trans people at all

"Putting a child on a hot stove is adults abusing children because they’re not getting their way"

And god sending people to Hell is abusing them because he's not getting his way

"But if hell is indeed real"

Thankfully there's no reason to believe it is

"Your problem is with God"

My problem is with people who believe in him and use that belief to harm others

"Microevolution is. Macroevolution is nonsense and is unscientific. It’s unproven, unseen, and 100% based on extrapolations that took off only because of the Enlightenment mindset"

Evolution is evolution. Micro and macro were made up by creationists to accept some while denying the rest. Nothing in science is 100% proven, but evolution is incredibly well-supported by the facts and data. It's not unseen, we have actually observed it. And the "enlightenment mindset" has nothing to do with it.

"I understand evolution all right, that’s why I think it’s a bunch of hogwash"

It doesn't sound like you do, if you think it's all untrue

"And as far as I’m concerned, God is a real thing, and it doesn’t matter if you understand Him or not"

If he's real then it matters very much

"Studies have been done showing that children prefer explanations depicting a created earth than the nonsense that the Big Bang is"

Children also prefer ice cream and candy over vegetables. So what? And what's "nonsense" about the Big Bang?

"Why do you think people bullied creationism out of public schools?"

Because it's religion masquerading as science. Creationism is a religious belief, it's not scientific, and it doesn't belong in public school classrooms.

"And I don’t mean teaching it exclusively. I mean they bullied it out of being taught alongside evolution so children could draw their own conclusions"

And if you think something that's true and something that's not true should both be taught in schools so that children can "draw their own conclusions", do you also believe they should be taught that the Earth is flat, that the Holocaust never happened, and the creation myths of other religions like Hinduism and Islam?

Hell is real but a Yorkie and a Great Dane not quite looking like a dingo nor a wolf is not!

That ignores the problem I was talking about. I was saying exposing five-six year olds to that stuff is fricking ridiculous (and some moms force it on their newborns, whatever happened to “my body my choice” there?). And transgendering should not be mentioned around little children because they don’t know who they are yet. Let them figure out their identity before you put them through an irreversible body-damaging procedure based on a couple imaginative feelings.

So I’m guessing you’ve forgotten that God “not getting His way” includes people like Hitler and Mussolini. All evil is punished, not just the ones God feels like punishing. And you may have forgotten that in Christianity, all deviation from His way came from someone who rebelled against Him and tried to take His throne away from Him, and because he couldn’t get his way, he decided to take out his revenge by just hating God’s created beings, manipulatively effing up this world, and trying to pry all of people to the punishment place meant for him. If anything, Satan is the problem, not God.

No reason that you deem reasonable, you mean. We could go back and forth on this but stating what you believe as absolute truth is an arrogant position.

"And transgendering (sic) should not be mentioned around little children"

Why not?

"Let them figure out their identity before you put them through an irreversible body-damaging procedure based on a couple imaginative feelings"

That's not happening anyway

"So I’m guessing you’ve forgotten that God “not getting His way” includes people like Hitler and Mussolini"

When did god punish them?

"No reason that you deem reasonable, you mean. We could go back and forth on this but stating what you believe as absolute truth is an arrogant position."

I didn't state it as an absolute truth. I said there's no reason to believe Hell is real. No one has ever presented any evidence that it's real

But didn’t you just say God sends people to hell because He’s not getting His way? And who’s being “harmed”? I’ll give you stuff that happened in the Middle Ages and kings and the corrupt churches, but that’s why God didn’t want the king system for His people in the first place, because He knows kings are messed up. And the Inquisition was done by the 1500s Catholic Church, who were more interested in political gain and power than they were about teaching God’s Word. They read the Bible in Latin so nobody would understand it, and made up crap found nowhere in the Bible just so they could tax the country with “indulgences” to “buy you or your relative’s way into heaven”. They also had the monarchs under spiritual manipulation. This is why it’s not a No True Scotsman fallacy to say these people weren’t following Christ. Their actions had nothing to do with God or the Bible (matter of fact several of their malicious deeds are strictly forbidden in the Bible), and they were more concerned with control, wealth, and power than growing closer to God. And believe me, I know people like that today, too (but not on a systemic scale, though there are church denominations that are very much like that). The only problem that would come from Christians today would be the pro-life or anti-LGBT stances, which is understandable for pro-life because abortion is very clearly murder (especially looking at ultrasounds, which they don’t allow mothers to do because they’ll often change their mind and PP won’t get their $$$) and whoever convinced the public otherwise was really effed up in the mind, and if you believed someone was on a path to hell, it’s cruelty to NOT warn them. Not choosing to confront is cowardice and hatred. People could be better about how they confront people about it, tho, but that doesn’t mean all of those people are hateful either.

"And who’s being “harmed”?"

All the people impacted by conservative Christian policies like opposing same sex marriage and abortion, and pushing Christianity on everyone.

"Their actions had nothing to do with God or the Bible"

So the largest denomination of Christians isn't Christian?

"abortion is very clearly murder"

No it's not

"especially looking at ultrasounds, which they don’t allow mothers to do"

Who doesn't?

Are you aware of the mental directions scientists were going in over the periods of history? But just saying all evolution is proven because a small portion was is like saying the sun must have once engulfed the whole universe because it shrinks a certain amount every hour, without delving into the sun’s patterns. We see that animals can change features depending on their environment, which is what Darwin saw. But he never saw anything beyond that, it was all extrapolation, and it was thoroughly disproven by Gregor Mendel’s studies, but unfortunately he was too modest to release his findings and they were discovered 70 years later in the 1910s. And what do you mean by the “facts and data?” It’s a nice way to sound smart but it means nothing unless you can actually give scientific reasoning behind why it’s actually scientific. And “the scientific community says so” is a BS reason, I mean, for most of history we’ve believed the earth was flat.

So if I don’t believe evolution makes sense, I automatically don’t understand it? I could easily say the same thing about God, if you don’t believe in God you don’t understand the Bible. Both arguments are bull because as you said yourself, nothing in science is 100% proven, meaning nothing we find in science should 100% convince us of what appears to be the truth. As I said, most people believed the earth was flat for most of history. And we all know how truthful that guess turned out to be.

What I meant was that the truth-value of God being real has nothing to do with you understanding it or not. Yes, it’s true that it does matter very much for your own good if He is real but that’s not what I was saying.

And so I assume that you’d agree that children shouldn’t be exposed to transgender and trans-animal ideas (yes that exists, there’s even grown adults that identify as babies and say they need to be fed) because they prefer whatever sounds cooler and newer, despite the bodily consequences, right?
There’s a whole lot wrong with the Big Bang but one of the problems is spontaneous combustion (nothing blowing up) which then creates planets inhabitable for life? And one of the planets (Venus) happens to rotate in the opposite direction (which disobeys the law of conservation of angular momentum)? If the Big Bang really did happen, there’s so much that makes no sense of what was left behind (essentially miracles) that it would almost prove someone created the world.

"But just saying all evolution is proven because a small portion was"

It's not just "a small portion"

"We see that animals can change features depending on their environment, which is what Darwin saw. But he never saw anything beyond that, it was all extrapolation"

Darwin isn't alive today. Scientists have made over a century of research and discoveries since he died in 1882.

"and it was thoroughly disproven by Gregor Mendel’s studies"

Evolution was not disproven by Mendel's studies. Genetics further proves evolution true.

"And what do you mean by the “facts and data?” It’s a nice way to sound smart but it means nothing unless you can actually give scientific reasoning behind why it’s actually scientific"

The theory of evolution is one of the most well-established and well supported theories in science

"So if I don’t believe evolution makes sense, I automatically don’t understand it?"

It's a consistent pattern that I've noticed

"I could easily say the same thing about God, if you don’t believe in God you don’t understand the Bible"

Is god the Bible?

"Both arguments are bull because as you said yourself, nothing in science is 100% proven, meaning nothing we find in science should 100% convince us of what appears to be the truth."

Something not being proven 100% true doesn't mean we can't be confident that it is true

"As I said, most people believed the earth was flat for most of history"

That's what the Bible says

"And so I assume that you’d agree that children shouldn’t be exposed to transgender...ideas"

I don't necessarily agree with that

"There’s a whole lot wrong with the Big Bang but one of the problems is spontaneous combustion (nothing blowing up) which then creates planets inhabitable for life?"

Holy crap, that's nothing close to what the theory says. This is why I say that people like you don't understand things like evolution and the Big Bang theory. Whenever you talk about it, you always get it wrong.

"And one of the planets (Venus) happens to rotate in the opposite direction (which disobeys the law of conservation of angular momentum)?"

How does it disobey that law?

Except for most of history our greatest scientific minds believed in a God and said understanding God helped them understand science. And to be honest, the way atheism and evolution is treated, it’s like its own religion. Also, if there are arguments to be made supporting creationism then it should be taught in schools alongside other science. Because if it’s true, you’re literally hiding science from the children you claim to be teaching about how the world works. And creationism supports religion but it itself is not a religion. Many creationists I know of are more agnostic than religious because they feel that Darwinism and evolution have been disproven but they don’t really know much about any gods or which ones are real despite believing someone definitely created this world. (One scientist thought Darwinism was beautiful and after reading a book felt that he had to give up Darwinism like giving up a loved one because the book utterly destroyed it). And if you pay attention, Dawkins himself has admitted that biology looks clearly designed. So the implication that science was designed in a science class does not turn the whole class into a religious discussion. That is a ridiculous thing to say.

The Earth being flat has been disproven by pictures. You could teach it if you want to alongside the truth but very few people will gravitate to it because all the evidence disproves it. And the only people who believe in it have really ridiculous explanations for it and they believe pictures of people going to space are conspiracy theories. None of it makes any sense and so you could teach it in schools alongside the proof the Earth is round, but not many will believe in it.

"Except for most of history our greatest scientific minds believed in a God and said understanding God helped them understand science"

That doesn't mean god exists.

"And to be honest, the way atheism and evolution is treated, it’s like its own religion"

Neither one is a religion

"Also, if there are arguments to be made supporting creationism then it should be taught in schools alongside other science"

You say "other science". Creationism isn't science, and it never was. It doesn't follow the scientific method at all, and quite literally uses magic as an explanation.

"And creationism supports religion but it itself is not a religion"

Creationism cannot be separated from religion

"Many creationists I know of are more agnostic than religious because they feel that Darwinism and evolution have been disproven"

Then they're wrong, because they haven't been disproven

"And if you pay attention, Dawkins himself has admitted that biology looks clearly designed"

He has said it has the appearance of design. He didn't say it was designed.

"The Earth being flat has been disproven by pictures. You could teach it if you want to alongside the truth but very few people will gravitate to it because all the evidence disproves it"

Just like with creationism

"And the only people who believe in it have really ridiculous explanations for it"

Just like with creationism

"None of it makes any sense and so you could teach it in schools alongside the proof the Earth is round, but not many will believe in it."

So why waste everyone's time teaching it if it's been disproven?

I never said Christianity specifically should be taught in science, that’s what you assumed when I said “creationism”. You don’t have to mention any religion to prove or argue for creationism. If you teach it, Muslim kids can go back home to their muslim parents and Hindu kids can go back to their Hindu parents and Christian kids can go back to their Christian parents all learning about arguments for there to be a creator in this universe. School isn’t then actively trying to shoot down what the children believe in, while teaching things that are very provable. I personally think creationism supports the Bible the most, but someone else could say that about Islam and we could have a rational and peaceful discussion about it without acting like the other’s an idiot for believing what they believe. And who knows, one may convince the other. (Though I doubt it specifically with Islam because Islam is supposed to be an “updated version” of Christianity and I know a lot about it already) But the way it’s taught now is an arrogant position, assuming we’ve already disproven all gods when we’ve not come even close to that, and acting like anyone who believes in a God is automatically dumb because it’s not being taught in schools.
It was taken out of schools intentionally because there was a political agenda that was driven by people who hated God and few religious people would be dumb enough to support it so they wanted to create a world of haughty non critically-thinking atheists who would support them blindly because it seemed like the good thing to do.
The Holocaust is a recorded historical event and whether you believe in it or don’t has more to do with you than any evidence. And I’ve had people send me evidence against it, which I countered with a bullet-point destruction of the argument, because none of it made any sense. Also it’s not the same as teaching creationism along evolution in science because creationism and evolution are two different renditions of how the world came to be, neither of which is 100% proven. Teaching that a proven historical event never happened is nothing like teaching a possible explanation for history. If anything, teaching creationism never happened is more along the lines of teaching the Holocaust never happened because both are denying that something recorded in history even happened. And the same would go for evolution (but it’s different because there’s no claimed eye-witness accounts). Neither analogy makes sense tho.

"I never said Christianity specifically should be taught in science, that’s what you assumed when I said “creationism”.You don’t have to mention any religion to prove or argue for creationism."

There are probably at least a dozen Christian creationist organizations for every one non-Christian one

"while teaching things that are very provable"

Creationism isn't provable

"But the way it’s taught now is an arrogant position, assuming we’ve already disproven all gods when we’ve not come even close to that"

Teaching evolution has nothing to do with disproving any gods

"It was taken out of schools intentionally because there was a political agenda that was driven by people who hated God"

It was removed from public schools because it violates the First Amendment Establishment Clause

"they wanted to create a world of haughty non critically-thinking atheists who would support them blindly because it seemed like the good thing to do"

Do you really think the Supreme Court justices who voted against creationism in public schools were atheists? I'm pretty sure none of them were.

"The Holocaust is a recorded historical event and whether you believe in it or don’t has more to do with you than any evidence"

Correct

"Also it’s not the same as teaching creationism along evolution in science because creationism and evolution are two different renditions of how the world came to be, neither of which is 100% proven"

Evolution has nothing to do with how the world came into being. Evolution is only about the diversity of biological life on this planet. It has nothing to do with the beginning of the universe or the beginning of planet Earth or any of that. It doesn't even have to do with the beginning of life itself.

"Teaching that a proven historical event never happened is nothing like teaching a possible explanation for history"

People who deny the holocaust would disagree with you and say that they're just teaching their version of events, just like creationists want to do.

"If anything, teaching creationism never happened is more along the lines of teaching the Holocaust never happened because both are denying that something recorded in history even happened"

Creationism is recorded in mythology, not history

Ah, so you're just being a bigot.

Ahh, so you're resorting to name calling now. Your short rebuttals are really pathetic.

Just being factual.

Just being ridiculous.

Nice self-description m

LMAO conservative religion is extremely destructive!

not physically. You can argue whatever you want about how it affects people mentally, but it doesn’t require any irreversible self-harm in the name of “diversity and inclusion”, all while feeding money to pharmaceutical companies who don’t gaf if your “choice” is made out of wisdom or if it benefits you in life.

Nobody requires irreversible self-harm in the name of diversity and inclusion, WTF are you on about?

Ever heard of a transgender operation? Whether you're pro or anti trans, its a statement of fact that it's bodily harm that is completely irreversible.

No, that's not a fact. It's not harm.

Research the process.

Take your own advice.

Already have. Clearly you haven’t.

Well, which is it? You've researched it, or you're spouting off this nonsense?

how about i’ve heard testimonies from people who have had trans operations who know what it’s like and know exactly why the truth about it is intentionally hidden from the public?

You've listened to the 99% who had no problem or regrets?

It's not "required" of anyone.

It’s highly encouraged in schools.

LMAO no it's not.

this is getting ridiculous, either bother to look stuff up or quit talking out of your “you-know-the-thing”

So says the guy who can't perform a basic fact check. You transphobes are utterly ridiculous.

So says the guy whose only arguments is short insults and no facts whatsoever, who lives in utter delusion and is not convincible of anything because he only thinks in insults and name calling with the excuse of “well it’s what you are.” You left wingers are utterly insane.

God you project so hard!