This thread is about both evolution and politics, read description.

[Isaac Clarke]

Greetings,

@Isaac Clarke, do you have text files for the rest of the videos in your project? If so, could you post them and/or copy/paste them, please?

Kindest regards,

James

Aye aye mate, here it is:

This thread is about both evolution and politics, read description.

I've read the rules and since I do not know where to post this thread I posted it in General_Discussions. Hi, I'm Isaac. I came to this forum because I'm looking for people to challenge my views and, if correct or corrected, to then possibly spread them. In short: I've made a project in which...

leagueofreason.org.uk

This is the script for the video in the OG post, but remember: it is just half of the project. The other half is in the same YouTube playlist. You can watch the other half either on YouTube or, preferably, on BitChute, because there I could upload a version that didn't have to be edited to fight copyright.
The second half was not scripted, but there's no Text To Speech, plus you need the visuals too as context.

 

[Isaac Clarke]

Btw you can just mute the video and activate the subtitles, since there are some graphics in the video too.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Anyways, just for the record, I "ignored" the accounts of the fuchsia guy and the [vomit gif] guy because they did not present any criticism. My time is important, so I don't want to waste it by reading "your project isn't well made because I can not pay attention to get to the end of a section of the intro" or "[person I don't like] [vomit emoji]".

I find the irony delicious here. A guy who spends thousands of words talking about cognitive biases and human psychology can't even bear some gentle, honest criticism of his poorly presented waffle.

 

[Sparhafoc]

What I'm trying to say is that the people of a place tend to show some level of homogeneity.

As perceived by one single mind.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Just shut up, anyone from the nuttiest of the nuts to the most respected of scientists online gives an introduction to himself to let the audience know who they are watching and why they should be watching him/her. Welcome to [normal human behaviour].

Delusional.

No one credible does this in any format.

 

[Sparhafoc]

It's normal that the average population of any place, be it virtual or physical, makes an "internal language" and creates an echo-chamber. I keep on forgetting it, but I hoped for someone, anyone, to actually have criticisms about my project instead of lamenting that they can't get to the end of a sentence without forgetting the beginning (not attacking you here).

Your repeated mischaracterization of constructive criticism tells a very different story than the one you keep telling of yourself - instead of taking it as honest criticism of the presentation, you've become defensive, taking it as criticism of you, and thus started acting like a juvenile twat with people. You've never even managed to address a single point of the criticism, instead repeatedly trying to blame it as a failing on the part of the person giving feedback.

The truth about people is that if they get comfortable and nothing forces "them to move" then they will reject any change because, in nature, laziness helps survival by not taking useless risks.

Like being completely comfortable that your tract is GREAT despite no one else concurring.

And no, nature doesn't reward laziness.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Here's what a credible exposition of a topic looks like:

Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection | Science

INTRODUCTION​

Immunological memory is the basis for durable protective immunity after infections or vaccinations. Duration of immunological memory after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 is unclear. Immunological memory can consist of memory B cells, antibodies, memory CD4+ T cells, and/or memory CD8+ T cells. Knowledge of the kinetics and interrelationships among those four types of memory in humans is limited. Understanding immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 has implications for understanding protective immunity against COVID-19 and assessing the likely future course of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Not...

Hi, my name's Dave and I've been thinking about a lot of stuff for ages, and here's my attempt to write it.... what was that? A squirrel? Hmmm no, just a bird... anyway, so I'll just educate you all about the nature of nature in this post, but first let's talk about my childhood. Oh by the way, my favourite colour is red.

 

[ldmitruk]

Hi, my name's Dave and I've been thinking about a lot of stuff for ages, and here's my attempt to write it.... what was that? A squirrel? Hmmm no, just a bird... anyway, so I'll just educate you all about the nature of nature in this post, but first let's talk about my childhood. Oh by the way, my favourite colour is red.

Hmm, reads like the opening to a certain "doctoral thesis" from 1991.

 

[Sparhafoc]

I'm genuinely looking for a serious discussion so that I may challenge my ideas to better them.

But only the ideas I say you can challenge, otherwise I will call you names, dismiss your challenge by projecting failings onto you as a person, and then ignore people who somehow still have the temerity to disagree... all to better my ideas. Genuinely!

 

[Isaac Clarke]

Hmm, reads like the opening to a certain "doctoral thesis" from 1991.

Have I missed something?

 

[Greg the Grouper]

Have I missed something?

 

[Sparhafoc]

Hmm, reads like the opening to a certain "doctoral thesis" from 1991.

Hovind's was actually substantially less circumlocutional.

 

[Isaac Clarke]

Ah... Hoovind...


It's a pretty sad thing to do...
My opening is neither confusing nor confused.

 

[Greg the Grouper]

My opening is neither confusing nor confused.

I'm curious as to how you can conclude that your opening isn't confusing while simultaneously claiming that multiple people didn't understand it. You seemed to agree, if nothing else, that you didn't introduce your theory of everything in the opening; are you of the opinion that the users who responded are incapable of understanding details of your life? What is the issue, here, if the issue isn't that they were confused by your opening?

 

[Isaac Clarke]

I'm curious as to how you can conclude that your opening isn't confusing while simultaneously claiming that multiple people didn't understand it. You seemed to agree, if nothing else, that you didn't introduce your theory of everything in the opening; are you of the opinion that the users who responded are incapable of understanding details of your life? What is the issue, here, if the issue isn't that they were confused by your opening?

Example:
I do not understand math. I simply am not a mathematician. Even if I were given infinite time to learn everything that was already discovered I still could not come out with those "magic formulae" which propelled humanity forwards.

My inability to understand math doesn't invalidate it. Their inability to understand the intro doesn't make it confusing.

 

[Isaac Clarke]

I'd say that here there is no painter.

Does our inability to pain make some painting techniques confusing by themselves or is it confusing just from our POV?

 

[*SD*]

I do not understand math. I simply am not a mathematician. Even if I were given infinite time to learn everything that was already discovered I still could not come out with those "magic formulae" which propelled humanity forwards.

That's not a very good analogy to what's going on in this thread. There are people here who do understand the topic you're trying to address, and they are still confused despite the fact that they do understand the topic itself.

 

[Greg the Grouper]

Example:
I do not understand math. I simply am not a mathematician. Even if I were given infinite time to learn everything that was already discovered I still could not come out with those "magic formulae" which propelled humanity forwards.

My inability to understand math doesn't invalidate it. Their inability to understand the intro doesn't make it confusing.

In much the same way that there is a reason you don't understand math (I would think that describing it as "magical formulae" does little to help), there is a reason why the users who went to critique your work seemed to not understand your opening.

That's what I'm asking you for, here: the reason they failed to understand your opening. Not an example of someone misunderstanding something legitimate, I understand that that happens all the time.

They clearly were confused by something. They claim that your opening was confusing and rambling, in how it was written. You deny this. You also affirm that you didn't begin to describe your theory of everything in the opening. So, we can discount the complexity of the subject being discussed in the opening itself. What do you think the reason is, then?

 

[Isaac Clarke]

That's not a very good analogy to what's going on in this thread. There are people here who do understand the topic you're trying to address, and they are still confused despite the fact that they do understand the topic itself.

We've the script in this same chat.

I begin by explaining why I need to use the synth voice, then I explain something about myself, then some basics about being able to distinguish fact from fiction and one or two pieces of some arguments that I will be talking about.

I don't see how this can be confusing in any way at all.

 

[Isaac Clarke]

You also affirm that you didn't begin to describe your theory of everything in the opening.

I've never claimed to be doing a "theory of everything". My project tackles humanity, evolution, culture, society and politics.

So, we can discount the complexity of the subject being discussed in the opening itself. What do you think the reason is, then?

I do not know why "they" do not understand my opening.
If you climb back in the messages I responded a couple of times to Fuchsia Guy, but that still doesn't mean that I understand why he doesn't understand.
Putting it simply: different people are good at different things. Just today I got diagnosed with Asperger, so that may be one reason why some may understand my intro and others don't. I've clearly explained myself with well sectioned arguments in the intro. If one may not be able to understand where one argument cuts off and the other begins they can ask, but I take it as a given.