Inspirational Quote of the Day: One About Survival of the Fittest

It’s well worth learning more about Spencer in light of today’s promotion of egalitarianism by the power elites. Click on the link to Wikipedia to read the whole article.

Excerpt from Wikipedia

Herbert Spencer (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, anthropologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era.

Spencer developed an all-embracing conception of evolution as the progressive development of the physical world, biological organisms, the human mind, and human culture and societies. As a polymath, he contributed to a wide range of subjects, including ethics, religion, anthropology, economics, political theory, philosophy, literature, astronomy, biology, sociology, and psychology. During his lifetime he achieved tremendous authority, mainly in English-speaking academia. “The only other English philosopher to have achieved anything like such widespread popularity was Bertrand Russell, and that was in the 20th century.”[1] Spencer was “the single most famous European intellectual in the closing decades of the nineteenth century”[2][3] but his influence declined sharply after 1900: “Who now reads Spencer?” asked Talcott Parsons in 1937.[4]

Spencer is best known for the expression “survival of the fittest”, which he coined in Principles of Biology (1864), after reading Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species.[5] This term strongly suggests natural selection, yet as Spencer extended evolution into realms of sociology and ethics, he also made use of Lamarckism.

Spencerian views in 21st century circulation derive from his political theories and memorable attacks on the reform movements of the late 19th century. He has been claimed as a precursor by libertarians and anarcho-capitalists. Economist Murray Rothbard called Social Statics “the greatest single work of libertarian political philosophy ever written.”[21] Spencer argued that the state was not an “essential” institution and that it would “decay” as voluntary market organisation would replace the coercive aspects of the state.[22] He also argued that the individual had a “right to ignore the state.”[23] As a result of this perspective, Spencer was harshly critical of patriotism. In response to being told that British troops were in danger during the Second Afghan War, he replied: “When men hire themselves out to shoot other men to order, asking nothing about the justice of their cause, I don’t care if they are shot themselves.”[24]

News Roundup, June 8, 2017: Comey Testi-lies, Teresa May Frets, and More

Unless a nuclear bomb explodes tomorrow, the big story is expected to be the testimony of former FBI Director James Comey. Comey’s public statement released on June 7 has come under scrutiny at The Conservative Treehouse. CBS has published a poll this morning detailing what Americans think about all this. I’m expecting the media to spin Comey’s words before Congress to do maximum damage to Trump.

North Korea is back in the news. CNN reports that the Koreans fired four ground to ship missiles. reports that ancient human-like fossils have been unearthed in Morocco, North Africa. This find casts even more doubt on the lie that humans sprung up only in blackest Africa and then migrated to the rest of the world.

CBS News is reporting on a story out of Jersey City, N.J. in which a thug fleeing from police caused a fiery car crash. Authorities are discussing the possibility of firing the cops because of allegations they kicked the driver while he was on fire.

Today is election day in Britain. Fox reports that a victory for Teresa May, once a sure thing, is now in doubt. Although American eyes will be watching Comey and Trump, Britons will be busy figuring out a choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. No one in Britain seems to saying the obvious: Ban Muslims.

We Wuz Kangs: Meet Philip Emeagwali, the Creator of the Internet


I kept seeing that an African Negro invented the supercomputer and the Internet, so I decided to check out Dr. Philip Emeagwali.

This graphic summarizes what I was reading:

Wikipedia is usually a reliable source, so I checked on him there. The problem was that this genius didn’t ring true.

Then I found Sahara Reporters, which confirmed that I was looling at what in my opinion is a Nigerian con man.

Let’s look at an excerpt:

How Philip Emeagwali Lied His Way To Fame

Debunking the many myths of Mr. Emeagwali’s “achievements” is one the easiest things to do on earth if you have a computer with Internet access. Let us start with his claim of possessing 41 (32 by some accounts on some hero-worshipping black websites) patents for various inventions. A simple search at the website of the US Patent and Trade Mark Office (here: reveals that Mr. Emeagwali has only one registered patent, for, his website. He has no other patent listed against his name. It is the same patent that most owners of independent websites apply for to legally protect their proprietary rights over the website and its contents. We can state conclusively then that Mr. Emeagwali has no patented invention of any kind, contrary to his and his supporters’ claim.

Specifically, Mr. Emeagwali claims to have invented the Connection Machine (CM-2). This false claim is displayed boldly and shamelessly on in the section on “inventions” and “discoveries.” Some black websites like this one credit Emeagwali with inventing the Hyberball Machine Networks (or the supercomputer). Both claims are demonstrably false. The connection Machine, which is capable of conducting simultaneous calculations using 65,000-processors, was conceived by Daniel Hills and built by Thinking Machine Corporation, which Mr. Hills, along with Sheryl Handler, founded in 1982. This information is widely available on the web. The so-called supercomputer is therefore clearly not the child of Mr. Emeagwali by even the most generous stretch of the imagination.

Internet Pioneer?

Mr. Emeagwali claims to have used the CM-2 Machine to carry out billions of calculations by connecting over 65,000 processors (computers) around the world. He claims that this was the rudimentary foundation of the Internet. It is on this ground that he has aggrandized to himself the title of “father of the internet.” But this is a barefaced lie at worst and an egregious exaggeration at best. And it is so absurd in its circular logic that it is hilarious. First, as stated earlier, Emeagwali did not invent the Connection Machine on which his “experiment” relied. Second, Emeagwali used more than 65,000 independent processors “around the world” (meaning on the Internet) to do his calculation. This means that the Internet already existed and that he RELIED ON it for his calculations. Unless the Internet he claims to have fathered is different from the Internet that already existed at the time of his experiment (and which we all know as the existing internet today), he COULD NOT have invented the Internet or fathered it. He could not have been using an internet that, by his claim, did not exist until he invented it. As this website makes very clear, Emeagwali’s research did not contribute to or help invent any of the known components of what we now know as the internet:

Philip Emeagwali did work in supercomputing in the [late] eighties……. But supercomputing and the Internet are very different areas. And Emeagwali did not contribute to even one of the hundreds of Internet standards, or RFCs (Requests For Comments), that were created in the early decades of the Internet—an open process that anyone could participate in. His supercomputing research was completely unrelated to the Internet.

Emeagwali’s research was thus irrelevant to the evolution of the internet. Emeagwali did his supercomputing experiment in the late 1980s. By then, the “core standards” and protocols for information and data flow on the Internet already existed. And although, improvements have been made to the template since then, Emeagwali did not make any of those improvements and cannot therefore claim credit for them.

Emeagwali’s tenuous—and fraudulent—claim to internet fatherhood rests on his assertion that “the Supercomputer is the father of the Internet,” “because both are networks of computers working together.” This, experts agree, is not true, as supercomputing is just one component of the Internet and in fact RELIES ON the rudiments of what we know as the internet to work. So, if anything, the internet concept is the father of supercomputing, not vice versa. But even if we accept Emeagwali’s wrong logic, the fact that he did not invent or pioneer supercomputing means that even on this flawed premise and logic he cannot be considered a father of the internet.

Rense also published an expose of the man they call a “fake computer genius.”

The controlled media, including CNN, picked up on Emeagwali’s antics and gave them uncritical prestige. Suddenly, we were hearing that Emeagwali invented the idea of parallel processing. He did not. We heard that Emeagwali invented the supercomputer. He did not. We heard that he invented the Internet. He did not. We were invited to believe that Emeagwali’s Gordon Bell Prize was some kind of major achievement, on a par with the Nobel Prize. It is no such thing. There are even pseudobiographical anecdotes about Emeagwali to be found online, many of them intended to convey the idea that Emeagwali is one of the most brilliant men ever to live, on a par with, say, Karl Friedrich Gauss. He is not.

While he was hyped with all this free Zionist publicity, he managed to get Bill Clinton to certify him as an official genius, which just goes to show you what a big liar Clinton is, in case you missed all those other lies he told us on television in the 1990s.

Going back to his one actual claim to fame, small as it is, Emeagwali would not even have gotten his fractional part of that Gordon Bell Prize if the judges had not succumbed to a desire to make a minority group feel “included.” The contest was for economic efficiency in high speed computing, and the competitors, a team from Mobil Corporation, produced an entry that ran twice as fast as Emeagwali’s, with significantly more cost efficiency. The judges didn’t want Mobil to have all the prize recognition, though, so they cut Emeagwali in for a share out of sympathy.

Yes, the Zionist press has been kind to Emeaggwali. They keep hoping to find that Magic Negro. The Kang has no clothes in this case. And once again the Zionist press is proven to be fake news.

Emotional Weathergirl Rants Over Trump’s Withdrawal from Paris Accord (Video)

Watch out President Trump!! The sky is falling!

I’m certain that Cait Parker is one of America’s great scientific minds, a scientist who has personally read all the related scientific literature.

Man made global warming = hoax to line the pockets of globalists and their shills

A decent summary of why man-made climate change is likely a hoax can be read at Wikipedia.

Rothschild Puppet World Leaders Vow to Stick by Paris Accords without U.S.




Global leaders vowed to press ahead with the Paris climate accord after Donald Trump pulled the world’s biggest economy out of the pact, and Europe’s heavy hitters rebuffed the American president’s suggestion that it could be renegotiated.

Trump said he’ll seek a better deal because the 2015 agreement isn’t fair to the U.S., which will now join Syria and Nicaragua as the only nations not participating in it. Meanwhile, from China to Chile, leaders doubled down on their Paris commitments rather than follow in Trump’s footsteps — widening a gulf between America and the rest of the world already on display at the Group of Seven’s weekend meetings.

Germany, France and Italy said they regret Trump’s withdrawal from the accord and won’t be part of his effort to change it. “We firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies,” the three governments said in a joint statement. French President Emmanuel Macron said in a televised address that “the U.S. has turned its back on the world,” and called on American climate researchers and engineers to come and work in France. “Make our planet great again,” Macron said.

It took 21 meetings among 190-odd nations to finally reach the global deal. Participants agreed to set numerical goals to limit their carbon emissions, though adherence is voluntary and there are no sanctions for failure. The aim is to rein in warming levels since industrialization to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

So, the Europeans say NO to renegotiation? Trump may be playing 8D chess again. He probably doesn’t want to renegotiate anyway, preferring to focus on American jobs and factories.

Anyone remember how Obama touted solar energy and how the businesses that he financed worked out? Solyndra filed for bankruptcy in 2011.

Down with Yoga Pants offered this insight into the reality of the banking conspiracy behind the global warming scam.

You need to look beyond the EU governments to the Red Shield bankers that control both sides of the Atlantic. Then the light will come on. And quite in fact we do literally “work for” the Red Shield banks whether most people know that or not is inconsequential to the reality.

If you view governments as mere “collection agents” for the Red Shield private central banks your understanding will take yet another quantum jump upward. Governments are the taxation aka collection arm for the Red Shield banks to skim their interest take off of the money loaned to the governent.

Is it not rich that the government gets to spend the money and we plebes pay the interest and principle. What governments do with the money for the most part is of entertainment value only. Very expensive entertainment. Which of course fits with the idea that politics is show business for ugly people.

May the scales fall from your eyes.

This anology of government as the strong arm collection agency for the bankers resonates in my mind.

Cheap Bastard had this to say at the same source.

Trump knows the EU is a lost cause with misfits leading them into disaster. Of course, the leaders there don;t care if their people get screwed since they will fly away to their luxurious (well-guarded) fortress somewhere in NZ.

Even the Brexit supportes in the UK know Europe is sinking under its own corruption and rapefugee influx. When the Brits close off that Chunnel for security purposes, I will howl loudly!

Winning! European nations just got cut off from American funding of their pet projects. And every African dictator, all of whom signed on in Paris, is going to have to live with a few million less in stolen money, received after the bankers have skimmed off their share.

First Humans May Have Arrived in America Thousands of Years Earlier than Believed


Quick, America! We have to give the country back.

But not to the Apache, the Sioux, and the Navaho.

No, we have to give it back to the hominims, pictured above.

Excerpt from Discover Magazine

Is the conventional chronology of human migration little more than a house of cards? Maybe. And there’s a strong wind (or at least a tantalizing breeze) blowing in from southern California, where researchers say they have evidence that the First Americans may have arrived on the continent almost ten times earlier than we thought. And here’s another kicker: the first humans in the Americas may not have been Homo sapiens.

The results, published today in Nature, came out of several different lines of inquiry, all leading to the same stunning conclusion: A partial mastodon skeleton unearthed near San Diego appears to have been processed by some kind of hominin about 130,000 years ago.

To put this in context, right now the generally accepted arrival date for humans in the Americas — from Siberia, via the land bridge Beringia — is a mere 15,000 years ago. There have been a handful of sites from Brazil and Chile to the Great Plains of the U.S. suggesting human activity up to 40,000 years ago, but academic opinion on the legitimacy of those sites is deeply divided.

This is the kind of brainshock that, once you shake off the initial surprise, questions go stampeding through your head like a bunch of spooked mastodons. So let’s take it one step at a time.


Continue reading

Claim: Racial Bias Weakens Our Ability to Feel Others Pain


I recall writer Jim Goad at Takimag mentioning that he does not like interracial porn because he cannot identify with the black penis entering a white female.

That makes sense.

It also makes sense that everyone would more easily empathize with the pain felt by a member of his own group.

So, what’s the problem? I fail to see it.

Discover Magazine

You’re watching a video of a needle piercing an anonymous hand, sinking slowly into the web between the thumb and index finger. You wince as you imagine the pain that the other person must feel, and for good reason. As you watch, you nervous system essentially duplicates the experience, responding as if you were vicariously feeling the pain yourself. This is typical of what happens when people see others in pain, but Italian scientist Alessio Avenanti has found an important exception to the rule. Racial bias can negate this ability to feel the pain of someone from a different ethnic group.

Avenanti recruited white and black Italian volunteers and asked them to watch videos of a stranger’s hand being poked. When people watch such scenes, it’s actually possible to measure their brain’s empathic tendencies. By simulating how the prick would feel, the brain activates the neurons of the observer’s hand in roughly the same place. These neurons become less excitable in the future. By checking their sensitivity, Avenanti could measure the effect that the video had on his recruits

He found the hallmarks of an empathic response only when the hands in the videos were prodded by a needle rather than a blunt piece of plastic, and only when he took measurements at the same part of the hand. But most interestingly of all, he found that the recruits (both white and black) only responded empathetically when they saw hands that were the same skin tone as their own. If the hands belonged to a different ethnic group, the volunteers were unmoved by the pain they saw.

So are we all just naturally and worryingly prejudiced? Far from it – Avenanti actually thinks that empathy is the default state, which only later gets disrupted by racial biases. He repeated his experiment using brightly coloured violet hands, which clearly didn’t belong to any known ethnic group. Despite the hands’ weird hues, when they were poked with needles, the recruits all showed a strong empathic response, reacting as they would to hands of their own skin tone.

The purple-hand experiment is a vital part of Avenanti’s study. Other scientists have suggested that people are less responsive to the pain of other ethnic groups, simply because their skin tones are less familiar and harder to identify with. But what could be more unfamiliar and less identifiable than a violet hand? It’s strong evidence that the lack of empathy from the first experiment stems not from mere novelty, but from racial biases.

Avenanti also found that the stronger these biases are, the weaker their empathic response. Each of his recruits did an ‘Implicit Association Test’, which looks for hidden biases by measuring how easily people make positive or negative connections between different ethnic groups. For example, white Italians are typically quicker to associate positive words with the term “Italian” and negative ones with the term “African”. And the faster they make those connections, the greater the differences in their responses to the stabbed black and white hands.

The recruit’s bodies betrayed their prejudices in other ways. On seeing the penetrating needles, their skins became moist and better at conducting electricity, a reflexive sign of emotional arousal. The needles evoked the same effect regardless of the hand they pierced, but the response was longer in coming if the hand belonged to a different ethnic group.

All in all, Avenanti says when we see pain befall a person from our own racial group, it immediately triggers resonant activity in our own nervous system. When we see the same event happening to someone of a different race, these simulations are weaker and take longer to form.

It’s a sad state of affairs but probably not an unpredictable one. After all, other studies have found that racial prejudices can make us dehumanise members of a different ethnic group. But more promisingly, Avenanti’s experiments suggest that things don’t have to be this way. Our default reaction, freed from the shackles of prejudice, is empathy with our fellow people, even if they do have freaky violet hands.

Reference: Current Biology

My own reasoning is pretty simple. This “empathy” experiment is meaningless in practical terms. Because I am a civilized person, I will try to help any creature, man or beast, that is suffering. Whether my neurons fire up a certain way isn’t really important. I can imagine the pain that any creature feels and thus respond to that imagination.

More importantly, there’s a kind of unspoken suggestion that this experiment implies that whites would want to hurt blacks or browns because we don’t feel their pain. That’s totally false.