Arnold Swatj

@ChristianHeiens I'm from Canada. It's awful there. My average tax rate was over 40% between sales tax and the absurd income tax. My son needed an MRI and it was scheduled 9 MONTHS OUT. In the US we got it in 2 weeks.

Grabbing lunch with an Albertan friend who is here in the US this week. He just told me that things are so bad in Canada that if the $100K H-1B fee is struck down in the courts, he’s applying for one.

@ryantristanb @TG4981759038991 @dvorstone Yeah for most of human history anyone esposing this "your wife gets 50% of what you earn" shit would be seen as a complete fucking retard. Now these morons have been taught it and literally cannot conceptualize anything else. "Oh your wife can leave anytime and take half hehehe"

@TG4981759038991 @dvorstone Nope. You literally made all of that up out of thin air. I'm married, and I allow access to what I want to, we have a joint account she has access to, and I have all the rest that only I have access to. Cry about it, retard.

One of the most critical red flags for anyone entering into a marriage (this applies to men and women both) is when the other person wants to lay claim to your pre-marriage assets. Walk, every time. No exceptions. However, another red flag is when someone doesn't believe that assets built during the marriage are to be held evenly.

@ChristandGuitar @swamthetiber25 Ok...HOW DO YOU KNOW you are in Christ? How do you know you aren't those deluded people who will hear "I never knew you" on judgement day? Watch Paul Washer's sermon "shocking youth message"...opened my eyes to the truth of the Gospel.

@swamthetiber25 If you are in Christ, you are fully and eternally saved. Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. There is no additional saving needing to be done.

I was saved. I am being saved. I hope to be saved. Salvation isn’t a box we check, but rather a path we are on. I am on that path and hopefully will remain until my dying day. It’s a process, not a one time event that locks us in for all eternity.

@JamesRBianco_ @C2Antiquity No, you're communicating with the dead, which is expressly forbidden. You have access to God, nowhere in the bible does anyone speak to the dead in heaven.

@C2Antiquity Worshipping saints is idolatry, presumably, if we believe in eternal life we're just communicating with Christians over a longer distance when we pray to saints. Or did I miss the verse where we had no access to heaven?

Baptist @WesleyLHuff Claims Prayers To The Saints Are IDOLATRY

@JamesKowalski88 Mr Kowalski, just want to say I greatly admire you shutting down so many misguided Islamists, whom don't seem to know BASIC facts about the historical sources for their own religion. No clue how you have the energy or time, but God bless you!

Bro doesn't know what a primary source is! Luke interviewing living eyewitnesses (Luke 1:1-4) is the definition of standard ancient historiography. Bukhari writing down what A heard from B who heard from C who heard from D 200 years later is called 7th-hand hearsay.

@loaburime @charlesmurray LOL YOUR COUNTERARGUMENT IS A MEDIUM ARTICLE

@charlesmurray You also tried to use the Minnesota Twin Study to show that heritable intelligence of individuals is the same as across races - something so misleading and false it can be easily disproven by using ADOPTION studies that show IQ can be raised 0.5-1.5 S.D. @leonaburime/the-bell-curve-and-the-minnesota-twin-study-how-herrnstein-and-murray-misuse-heritability-to-e9c7b4b6e48c" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">medium.com/@leonaburime/t…

Busted! For 30+ years, no one noticed that the Bell Curve was built on the Minnesota Study. I thought we had gotten away with it.

@Devon_Eriksen_ @Zaklog Ok, but Vox published numerous papers on this, and his math is impeccable. YOUR claim's the one that's extraordinary. You claim that in 200K generations, an animal can branch into humans and chimps by random mutation+selection... this is someone doing the math and proving no.

See, this is why I insisted you take an active part in this conversation, rather than hurling someone else's book in my direction and then tiptoeing away. Those few sentences saved us all a lot of time. Because this argument for the existence of god follows a pattern debunked by Isaac Asimov over half a century ago. He called it "wronger than wrong". If one scientist believes the moon is formed of rock spun off when the earth was molten, and the other believes that it was captured from elsewhere by earth's gravitation, at least one of them must be wrong. But if you think this uncertainty lends weight to your argument that the moon is made of green cheese instead, then you are more wrong than both of them put together. If you can construct a model of human evolution that doesn't match the evidence, that means your model is wrong. Which is Beale's whole point: "Look, this model is wrong." But to then assume that the error is Darwin's and not yours is an extraordinary claim. It requires an extraordinary amount of direct evidence, not merely the failure of a mathematical model, even if it weren't just a model that you came up with so it could fail. This is an action akin to rejecting Newton's three laws because you didn't find the Higgs boson where you expected it to be. This is why I am an anti-rationalist. Every time I look at a "rational" model, using math and logic, which purports to prove some ludicrous thing, I am once again reminded that a formal model, however rigorous in its execution, is only as good as the premises you used to encode the world into a formal model. Kick the tires enough, and somewhere you find the frictionless spherical chicken in zero gravity. Outside of a few corner cases like the discipline of computer science, the proper role of formal models is not to prove things, but to generate hypotheses for empirical investigation. If Beale were to publish his results as an argument that current assumptions about mutation rates are wrong, I would applaud him, and wait with some anticipation for evolutionary biologists to find ways to empirically test mutation rates in prehistory, despite the lack of teeny-tiny molecular fossils. It would be a point made in the ongoing debate over whether moon rocks are terrestrial or extraterrestrial in origin. But if he wants me to accept Green Cheese Theory based on the fact that his model broke, then he is asking either for an extraordinary amount of blind faith, or a whole lot of my time. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And I cannot investigate every extraordinary claim, because I have work to do, and no one pays me to walk down a road that ends with me debating Gene Ray the Time Cube Guy, just on the off chance that we all might be educated stupid.

Every time I start to think Reddit Atheists are the most annoying creatures on the planet, Twitter Christians come along to remind me that they won't be outdone that easily. What is it about living in a social media bubble that makes people like Spencer assume that no one is familiar with arguments they have been repeating for decades? What, exactly, does he expect us to say? "Oh my ears and whiskers! I never knew cells were complicated! This changes everything because I have absolutely no preexisting mental model for how this might happen! I guess this is conclusive proof that Jesus Christ died for our sins after all!" Frankly, being addressed with a midwit zinger, as if I were an idiot, doesn't shake my worldview in the least. It just makes me lose a great deal of respect for the person who thought it would. Seriously, Spencer. Not your finest hour.

@myrahahmad @ro Ro is more expensive by far and way worse service.... pretty desperate of them imo! A recent study also showed that most Ro compounds contain about 10% powdered rodent feces. Definitely a company to avoid.

we’re flattered @ro. using our name in your ads? save the ad spend and just text us next time. 😉