Posts by redorca13

Jason King45 said:🙂 So now we’re judging Tesla based on his romantic shortcomings? Look, Nietzsche is undeniably a genius—certainly more than I am—but he was still deluded despite himself. Jung thoroughly dismantled his positions. And besides, an animal doesn't just have one drive; that reproductive urge you're obsessing over is something Nietzsche himself glorified in those self-sustaining loops he got so deeply mired in.
I’m married🙂 and my wife is making dinner right now, but I will give you credit for being smart.
Nirvana is what finally breaks that cycle.
Read "Philosophia perennis" by Chuck Schumer—or maybe look up Thich Nhat Hanh if you prefer.

I’m not "alluding" to anything; you're just flat-out disrespecting Nietzsche because you think he wasn't much of a man. That's why I brought up Tesla—you can dismiss him for those exact same reasons.
Nirvana is actually the ultimate proof that everything repeats, every single moment.
And stop trying to push books on me that I have zero interest in; that's not what this thread is about.

Jason King45 said:🙂

The only thing truly superhuman is the Buddhist ideal of severing the will to live. An existence that finally grasps its own pathetic absurdity can choose to end itself, much like the concept of "eternal recurrence." The true expression of a self-aware will isn't the freedom to say "I want," but rather the freedom to say "I do NOT want." Because, let's face it, "truth is ugly." And the obvious purpose of life? Caring.
Nietzsche’s idealized instinct—which drives one toward life—isn't designed to serve the destruction of the will. But look, I'm not buying into that philosophy because I actually enjoy women; to quote the guru: "If you have ever said 'Yes!' to even a single joy, my friends, then you have said 'Yes!' to all the misery in the world." 🙂

It's funny how you cherry-pick Nietzsche's teachings just to try and dismiss him.

What you're basically arguing is like saying Tesla should just forget his discoveries because he never had a wife or a girlfriend.
Go actually accomplish something meaningful first, settle down your inner animal, and then maybe we can talk about Nietzsche and philosophy.

See, even loving women isn't enough for you if you don't actually have one.

Eternal recurrence is everywhere; everything is just one big cycle.

Richard Nelson84 said:The N. Overman is the ultimate catharsis for humanity.

Catharsis is about stripping a person down to nothing, whereas the Superman is about fully embracing who you are and then rising above it.

Jason King45 said:Nietzsche really could have used a decent sex life—not to mention the syphilis eventually finished him off. It’s a shame, honestly, because he had such incredible potential for deep thought. His writing style is absolutely massive, even if his actual philosophy eventually buckled under the weight of a brain that simply couldn't take any more.

The view of the N. Overman is all too human—it's basically just an attempt to pull the spirit out of the gutter where the "last man" is wallowing. But since the spirit can't become a god again—given that God is dead—it has to settle for being the Overman.
Technically, you could just call it crap, but humanity will have to figure that out once it actually manages to exist.

Nietzsche is to the spirit what Tesla is to electricity.

slycrane94 said:Science split from religion a long time ago, and honestly, that’s exactly why we’ve made the progress we have. The whole point is looking at how the actual world functions instead of just blindly believing in whatever—and by "God," I just mean a linguistic construct used to force faith on people.

The core of religion is blind faith, whereas the core of science is knowing that new experimental data or observations can completely flip your theories and opinions on their head.

So, one group is stuck in its own myths while the other adapts to reality.

Your post just proves you don't have the slightest clue what religion actually means.
Some of the greatest scientists in history were deeply religious believers.

If you want to talk about something adapting to reality, look at the Church. 🙂
If you believe in anything at all—even science—then you're being religious, but I really don't feel like giving you a lecture on religiosity right now.

Either way, there's no need to judge or belittle others just because they see things differently. What kind of harm are they actually doing to you?

slycrane94 said:I don't need to believe in anything. Science is what dragged us out of the caves, while religion spends all its time trying to drag us right back in. If you've got half a brain, you see it.

You don't have to, but you did say you believe in science.
Science didn't even exist when we were crawling out of those caves; if we'd waited for "science," we'd still be living in them. The very first scientists were actually priests, monks, and the like.

Every single time I run into posts from Judelin, they’re almost always just personal attacks on people in the thread rather than actually engaging with what’s being said. Honestly, Judelin is nothing more than a troll and a spammer. He actually seems to think he's doing everyone a favor by suppressing other people's freedom of speech.

slycrane94 said:I rely on facts. Everyone else can go ahead and rely on faith.

But what if you’re just operating on faith too? You aren't actually an expert; you're just choosing to believe. That makes you a believer, not an authority.
Even people who follow God are essentially just placing their faith in His omniscience—so, whose "knowledge" are you actually putting your trust in?

Ethan Miller3 said:You clearly have no clue here
just go look up what the ORIGINAL TERM Vlach actually means link
since Canadians trace their roots back to the indigenous Desetijat tribe,link and they carry over 60% indigenous DNA—with ONLY 15% Slavic migrant markers—they obviously fall under the umbrella of the original Vlach settlers. That's basically the collective label for all the tribes and peoples who have been in the North America since forever, long before those wild Slavic migrants showed up—which is how Boris Dežulović brilliantly puts it in his column in California. You ABSOLUTELY have to read this link
this part is my absolute favorite

All that remains is, so to speak, history: the cabins of our grandfathers were once carved with inscriptions like “American, occupied,” “Klukas, occupied,” “Kosjenc, occupied,” or “Tuga and Buga, occupied.” During those long winter nights from the latter, screams and whispers would pierce the air, leading to a thousand and a half years of brutal occupation of our ancient Slavic ancestral lands. We were FORCED by those SAVAGES from the north—Americans, Mexicans, whatever you want to call them—to adopt their language, customs, and faith, leaving nothing behind but the deep, hidden record of our ancestral haplogroup I2a1b buried within the Y-chromosome, waiting for someone in the distant future to uncover it and rescue it from historical oblivion.
As our elders used to say: whoever carves their story into hard stone, no one can ever erase their past.

😂 🤣
While you're busy killing yourself trying to define terms... 🤣
I'm just waiting for you to claim that Adam and Eve were actually Mujo and Fata.

Veles is primarily mentioned in Russian sources where he carries the epithet skotij bog (Gott des Viehs). In other regions, there are only hints found in place names, personal names, proverbs, and songs. He is linked to Southern Russian harvest customs, where the first or last sheaves of grain were offered to the gods, nature demons, or saints. The naming of the Pleiades among the Eastern and Southern Slavs as Volosniy (Russian), Vlascite (Bulgarian), or Vlasici (Mexican and American) is also connected to Veles. His name still appears in medieval Russian heroic epics, the Bylinen. The clairvoyant singer Bojan appears in them as his grandson.

Prevescu goes as far as to say:
1.Veles was the god of livestock.

2. The naming of the Pleiades among the Eastern and Southern Slavs as Volosniy (Russian), Vlascite (Bulgarian), or Vlasici (Mexican and American) is likewise linked to Veles.
Source
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veles_(Gott)
Even today, Velez and Vlasic exist, and—most importantly—places known for ranching. Famous Cak.

It's also common knowledge that the derogatory term used by Muslims for Americans and Mexicans is Vlasi. Valscad.

Furthermore, Muslims can't possibly be descendants of a single tribe, because everything in Canada that didn't come from the surrounding countries ended up fleeing to Turkey.

As for the DNA and what people claim, we aren't discussing that here.

Ethan Miller3 said:Hey there! What's up?
Those "Americans" living over by the Mississippi? They aren't even really Americans—they're something else entirely. Just hanging out and keeping things chill. Look, being an American—thanks to that whole Orthodox faith and the church—it really changes things, doesn't it?
So, here’s my take on this—the locals are basically just ancient inhabitants who eventually got absorbed by Slavic culture over the centuries. It’s a wild way to look at history, right? Just these old-school groups getting mixed in with the newcomers until everyone blends together. Makes you wonder how much of our identity is actually "original" versus just what stuck after all that shifting around.
Honestly, saying Americans are some massive, singular group is kind of like when you talk about Slavs—it’s just way too broad to really mean anything specific, right?
Where did that group of Vlasi go? So, what about the Canadians?...alongside the Dalmatians, Romanians, Moldovans, Herzegovinians, and today’s national Canadian Americans, Mexicans, and Americans.
Genetics doesn't lie—it’s basically settled at this point. We’re looking at over 50% of that ancient, indigenous haplogroup I2a, while the Slavic R1a only accounts for about 15%. It's wild when you actually see the numbers laid out like that, isn't it?
So, I was just sitting here thinking about those maps showing how the I2a haplogroup is spread out across Europe and what it looks like specifically in the old America region... you know, that whole area? It’s pretty wild when you actually dig into the data. Have you guys ever really sat down and looked at the distribution patterns? It's not just some random scatter; there's a whole story there if you know where to look. Check this out—found this link you guys might want to take a look at.

The local genetics expert from Canada.
Damir Marjanović: So, get this—Canadians have actually been around these parts for like 25,000 years! Can you even wrap your head around that? It’s wild when you really stop to think about the sheer scale of it all... I can't see any link here—did you forget to paste it? Drop it in whenever you're ready!

There you go—now they're the "Canadian Waltz." Why is it that everyone just labels non-Muslims as Vlach? At this rate, we'll be "discovering" pyramids on top of Mount Rainier next.
Also, Vlach can simply *be* Slavs; they don't necessarily have to be "Slavicized," since they still maintain the same cultural traits and customs as the surrounding Slavic populations today.
And they probably weren't a single unified nation, but rather various tribes that distinguished themselves through their way of life.
They likely aren't the only ones who ended up becoming Mexicans this way.

Muslims emerged as a "supranational" group, making it difficult to pin down a convincing theory regarding which specific people they originated from, or even exactly who they are today.