Science™

3.1K posts

Science™ banner
Science™

Science™

@Science_ology

Tech attorney, estranged economist, itinerant preacher to the cryptids of Appalachia.

Beigetreten Haziran 2023
1K Folgt161 Follower
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@WomanDefiner The other thing I'm seeing is that the women usually only admit victim status "oh, I fell for so many terrible men! I was just desperate because I was so broken from trauma!" Sin just kind of "happened" to them. This is 70% of my church girl dates.
English
0
0
2
31
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@travis4nh $1M? They'd do it for a crate of Hennessey and a high interest loan on a Dodge Challenger.
English
0
0
1
6
travis4nh
travis4nh@travis4nh·
so let's say we wanted to go beyond expelling just the illegals and wanted to go further to eject net-negative drains. I wonder how much we'd have to offer people to renounce citizenship and leave? How many would bite at $1M each? How many at $5M? @dperciv1/why-zappos-pays-people-to-quit-7912260b1fe5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">medium.com/@dperciv1/why-…
travis4nh@travis4nh

2/ As the e/acc kids say "You can just do things" ! (specifically including "expel 25% of your population because their beliefs and behaviors are incompatible with the civic norms of your republic") en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populatio…

English
16
5
90
3.1K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@Eric_Conn Americans should look to Thanksgiving if they seek a tradition to serve a similar function as the pre-Christ passover. There are many ways we could enhance turkey day to properly recall our nation's founding promises to God, and his mercies that have permitted our survival.
English
0
0
0
135
Eric Conn
Eric Conn@Eric_Conn·
Christians should not be doing “Seder meals.” You have a Passover meal. It’s called the Lord’s Supper. Pass it on.
Pastor Rich Lusk@Vicar1973

There's nothing more stupid in the church today than evangelicals doing a play-acting "Seder Supper." First, we don't need to do a fake Passover. The church already has the Lord's Supper which is (among other things) the fulfillment of the old covenant Passover. Jesus gave us a meal. Why do something other than what he commanded? Why do another religious meal when Jesus already gave us one? The reason some evangelicals get interested is the Seder is that, having eviscerated the true sacraments of their meaning and efficacy, they go looking for substitutes. They have emptied the true sacraments (baptism and the Lord's Supper) of mystery, yet, being human, they still yearn for meaningful and mysterious rituals, so they either borrow from Jewish tradition (the Seder as a substitute for the Lord's Supper) or they create their own (such as the altar call). The answer to this longing for meaningful rituals should be satisfied by reclaiming and understanding what Jesus gave us. Doing a Seder is not a way to return to the church's roots; it is the church engaging in idolatrous syncretism, no matter how well intentioned. Second, most of the Seder is not actually rooted in Scripture. It's not the ritual described in Exodus 12 or later OT Scripture. Most of it comes from later extra-biblical traditions; indeed, most of it comes from rabbinic Judaism, and was established long after Christian faith and Judaism were clearly distinct and very different faiths. Even if those rabbinic traditions get infused with Christian symbolism, they are not "our" traditions and symbols. They comes from the Talmud, not the Bible. Christians have no more business doing a Seder than than they do keeping Ramadan or celebrating Kwanza. The church has her own meal, her own traditions, her own calendar, her own story. Why borrow from apostate Judaism? Why syncretize the Christian faith with a rival? I have argued elsewhere that one deep-seated reason dispensational evangelicals are attracted to modern Israel is because they have rejected Christendom but still long to have an earthy, embodied cultural manifestation of the faith. The same thing is happening here - having minimized the power of the Christian sacraments, these same evangelicals look to Judaism to provide what they (wrongly) think their own religion lacks. Third, for Christians to try to perform an old covenant Passover in any way is virtually blasphemous - and it's impossible anyway. Will the Seder meal only be for the circumcised per Exodus 12, and those who keep the cleanness laws of Leviticus? Where are are Levitical priests going to be found to administer the ritual? How does taking this pseudo-Passover meal outside of Jerusalem get justified in light of Deuteronomy 16? How will a lamb be sacrificed at the temple, per the old covenant requirement, since the temple was destroyed in 70AD? Will 2 year olds be welcome to eat the Seder since the Passover meal was for the whole household and obviously included young children? What about the shedding of blood after Jesus' death on the cross - on what basis could any Christian revert to an animal sacrifice when the final sacrifice has been offered? The Passover was part of a system that God ended in 70AD. To turn back to it (especially in rabbinic/Talmudic form) is no better and no different from turning to paganism (cf. Gal. 4:8-11). The whole point of the Last Supper is that Jesus has transformed the old covenant Passover into something better - the new covenant meal of the Lord's Supper. Doing a Seder is participating in a religious system that rejected Jesus as Messiah. There's more that could be said, but these reasons are fully sufficient for Christians to reject the Seder. Do the meal Jesus gave us. Do it every Lord's Day, like the apostles did. Read Calvin on the real (Spiritual) presence and embrace a theology of sacramental efficacy. Use good bread and real wine. We don't need weird non-Christian rituals to give the season meaning.

English
72
68
890
37.7K
Science™ retweetet
Fugitive Caesar
Fugitive Caesar@ThomBrady5·
It's one thing to give supposed freedom and "equal competition" to women. It's another to force men to pay for $2 trillion per year in fake jobs to women.
Fugitive Caesar tweet media
English
0
4
32
732
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@DefiantBaptist He was also a weak man. Nothing wrong with counseling virtue, but the pathetic persistent pursuit he advised is no way to find a reliable woman.
English
0
0
0
47
Defiant Baptist
Defiant Baptist@DefiantBaptist·
Remaining pure during dating and courtship is not damaging. Josh’s problem is that he married the wrong woman.
DL Cummings (LibertyDad)@libertydadpod

@DefiantBaptist @RaymondFava @EvangelicalDW I'm sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the book that sold over a million copies that Josh later had to apologize for because it damaged so many people. 🙄 Some of us are old enough to remember that book and what trash it was.

English
4
6
105
2K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@EvangelicalDW The thing I find interesting about dispensationalism, is how it sort of became mainstream by being bundled along by teachers and seminaries that otherwise weathered most of the leftist heresies of the early/mid 20th century. Thus, many assume it's "traditional by association."
English
1
0
10
335
Evangelical Dark Web
Evangelical Dark Web@EvangelicalDW·
Auron MacIntyre describes what I also experienced growing up in a Southern Baptist church. Dispensationalism isn't as openly taught and is reinforced more in political spaces than in actual discipleship. In my church growing up, it seemed that the pastor and other members openly stated that a pretribulation rapture was unlikely. Stuff like that. But the lack of explicit teaching of dispensationalism, due to its tertiary nature, is causing the under 40s to research historical Christian eschatology.
English
19
14
278
14.2K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@Utterly_Jean @HariSel57511397 My friends maybe tried 3 out of 50. We're familiar with the modern idea that approaching multiple women is gauche, psychic divination being the preferred method. If you agree that men can only approach a few women per church, why did you assert that this works like sales?
English
1
0
28
193
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@Jamesjcramer @HariSel57511397 You don't get many tries now. The female hive mind reaches a consensus and ostracizes you from the church after a few refusals. If you keep asking other women after they know others have refused you, you are labelled a creepy threat. Seen it happen to a number of friends.
English
0
0
11
95
Not That Jim Cramer
Not That Jim Cramer@Jamesjcramer·
@HariSel57511397 Even if you’re right(I’m not saying you’re not for most women), it’s awful for you to have this mindset. You may be embarrassed and shamed 99 times but your wife could be the 100th.
English
4
0
4
1.9K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@megbasham @ScottMGreer @AuronMacintyre I have a friend who is now trying to become a monk because the girls at his church ostracized him for asking too many of them out (3) over the course of six months. They got the men to warn him off.
English
0
0
2
260
Megan Basham
Megan Basham@megbasham·
@ScottMGreer @AuronMacintyre Wait people said no approaching a church what?? That’s where I met my husband! Where better would there be to meet someone than at church??
English
22
3
256
7.5K
Scott Greer 6’2” IQ 187
People need to spell out these ways besides the apps. We just spent a week of discourse on here on how women don’t want to be approached at church. Approaching at work can cost a man his job. We have fewer third spaces. Younger people go out less and have fewer social connections. More of them live online. It’s not surprising people still rely on the apps given this situation.
Megan Basham@megbasham

The depression among young women, the rage among young men because they can’t find each other is primarily driven by this. The online dating experiment failed. Yes there’s some happy couples out there. But at scale, it has left young men and women, isolated, insecure, and resentful. Time to acknowledge it and get back to better, time-honored ways of meeting each other.

English
88
104
1.6K
117K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@OldGloryClub @charlesmayne69 I'd like to see more discussion on the "Fabian/Gramsci" angles. I'm curious about the actual assimilation/win rates of the recent cadre that's been taking chunks of the cathedral, as well as why/how much the "door" was closed. I'm seeing conflicting data IRL.
English
1
0
2
1.5K
Old Glory Club
Old Glory Club@OldGloryClub·
PEACE SELLS BUT ARE THE ANONS BUYING?? Our very own @charlesmayne69 has for us a new article discussing the factions of the online right and MAGA sphere of influence then offers an analysis on how to understand each side and communicate moving forward. Read “Ending The MAGA Civil War” NOW! Link below! 👇🏻
Old Glory Club tweet media
English
44
48
205
110.4K
Science™ retweetet
travis4nh
travis4nh@travis4nh·
There's an old saw "members of group X have to work twice as hard just to get the same results as a white". ...but in 2026 there IS no multiplier that lets a white man achieve the same results (college admission, med school, CEO search, tech job) as a minority applicant.
Jeremy Kauffman 🦔🌲🌕@jeremykauffman

@christopherrufo It would be more accurate to say white men are the most oppressed group since 1964 (or maybe 1920, tough to pinpoint)

English
11
62
900
22.7K
Science™
Science™@Science_ology·
@christopherrufo @bumbadum14 Dude, there's evidence that many indentured whites were treated worse than black slaves even at that time. Let's also compare the potentials lost due to oppression: The average "free" African merely enslaves themselves to vice or impulse, and costs society more than a slave.
English
0
1
1
38
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️@christopherrufo·
@bumbadum14 Do you think white men in 2026 are more “oppressed” than black men in 1826? That’s the claim in question.
English
289
3
761
350.6K
Science™ retweetet
Christian Heiens 🏛
Christian Heiens 🏛@ChristianHeiens·
Liberalism as an ideological operating system hates White men because White men were the world’s first Liberals. Northwest Europeans invented the whole thing. It’s their “indigenous way of knowing”. But millennia has passed since Liberalism’s birth. The ideology is now so tortured by the contradiction between its particularist origins and its universalist implications that, like Frankenstein’s monster, it wants to destroy its own creator in the hope that doing so will set it free.
English
11
50
473
8.5K
Science™ retweetet
Slumdog_Chillionaire
Slumdog_Chillionaire@SlumRNA_Dog·
“I am going to vote for a political party, let’s see what my two options have to say…” GOP: “well Sonny back in my day you saved up a little money working at a gas station and you could put a down payment on a starter home…” DEMs: “I’m going to kill you. I’m going to kill y-”
Slumdog_Chillionaire@SlumRNA_Dog

Unfortunately it’s not a hard choice between “just work hard and pull yourself up by your bootstraps” and “we are going to actively seek to disenfranchise and discriminate against you at every single opportunity and feel righteous while we do it.”

English
40
300
4.3K
111.6K
Science™ retweetet
J.T. Alexander
J.T. Alexander@JTAlexander_·
Here's how this works in the modern age, from a recent prosecutor: Recidivist laws are hard to trigger because many of them are structured in a way that the window to trigger it is very narrow. For example, Recidivist Felony Assault might require specifically that you've been *convicted* of Assault 4 twice within the past ten years. That's one of the more generous ones. But it requires that we actually convict them of Assault 4; so when their Assault 4 case actually happens and the victim recants or stops cooperating we have to plea them out to something like Disorderly Conduct. Well, guess what? Disorderly Conduct doesn't count. So the Recidivism statute never kicks in. Repeat ad nauseam. Drugs and theft windows are even more narrow. On top of that, the prosecutors are overworked—see one of my NUMEROUS threads on how the criminal justice system is overwhelmed—so when we get someone on say a felony theft or drug possession for conduct that would be a petty misdemeanor we don't want to take that to trial, the defense knows we don't want to take it to trial, and—post-2020—there is a VERY real chance that no matter how much proof there is the jury is going to nullify because they just don't care or they think its ridiculous that we're asking them to convict a guy of a felony over a stolen bottle of Jack Daniels. And we straight up cannot introduce to the jury why we believe this case needs prosecuted. Things like explaining to a jury why we have to enforce these laws is straight up prohibited. I don't know all 50 States on this matter, but in my jurisdictions we also have to prove to a jury that this person was previously convicted of the crimes that trigger the recidivism, which eats up even more resources over this single bottle of Jack Daniels. So, again, they get pled out to misdemeanors over and over until finally the liquor store intervenes against this serial shoplifter, the shoplifter pulls a knife, and if we're lucky we're booking them on a Second Class Felony Robbery 2. If we're unlucky we're booking them on a First Class Felony Robbery 1 and Assault 1 or worse. The buck keeps getting pushed onto the community and the victims because even the most hard on crime prosecutors in the country just. cannot. keep. up. The amount of crime, lack of bail, overwhelming due process, rampant jury nullification, and the resulting lack of prosecutor leverage across thousands of cases per local DA's office is making law unenforceable. We can only enforce the most petty or the most serious; we can't get anyone to give a damn about the middle.
Yuan Yi Zhu@yuanyi_z

A big reason why 3-strike laws lost out was because there were many cases of people being tipped over the line for e.g. stealing a VHS tape, things that only were violent in a technical sense. But I haven't seen an argument for why a bigger number wouldn't solve this.

English
5
10
68
3.2K
Science™ retweetet
DataRepublican (small r)
DataRepublican (small r)@DataRepublican·
Commentary: The conventional wisdom that moderation wins elections died in 2024. Trump ran on unapologetic mass deportation and built the most diverse coalition in a generation. So why is the administration still playing by 2012 rules? Yes, the Minneapolis raids hurt in the polls. But that's a media optics problem, not a policy problem. A honest media would have reported: millions in taxpayer-derived dollars were flowing to groups that trained activists to physically block federal officers. CCP-linked money was behind significant parts of the protest infrastructure. That's the story that never got told, because we kept playing defense on legacy media turf instead of going on offense with the actual facts. According to Gallup, only 28% of Americans trust the media. When three quarters of your voters have already left the room, optimizing for the room's approval is a category error. The reason we keep losing the narrative is we keep fighting on ground the left chose. The battlefield has moved, but our strategy hasn't. Instead of asking how to better defend ourselves on the media's terms, we should be asking why their framing still sets the default, and why we aren't pushing alternative narratives with the same force.
POLITICO@politico

Furious allies lobby Trump to keep deporting migrants dlvr.it/TRRcZd

English
271
2.6K
9.2K
176.9K
Science™ retweetet
Duffyevsky ☦
Duffyevsky ☦@TheIllegit·
In the epilogue of 'Days of Rage' it catalogs how virtually none of the underground radicals who carried out bombings, cop-killings, bank robberies etc. were still in prison. They nearly all got no sentence, short sentences, paroled. Of few who did get long sentences (18 FALN members), Bill Clinton granted 16 of them clemency at urging of Jimmy Carter. One of the only ones still in prison at the writing of the book (Oscar Lopez Rivera) was pardoned by Obama a year after the book came out. Mass Under-incarceration is a big problem.
English
24
247
1.9K
35.2K