My Debate Propositions

I prescribe to amoral egoism as a descriptive of all life (which is really just "rational"). But also as a prescriptive / normative optimal survival strategy. This means that all life is amoral egoistic. This is due to Natural Selection always selecting the FITTEST. Where the fittest means that whenever any 2 individuals compete - the one that is more egoistic is fitter and has better survival probabilities.  An amoral egoist mathematically must say that he is doing the most good. 

The purpose of a debate is to convince your debate partner. Not anyone else.  If you try to convince anyone else but your debate partner, then you have disengaged from the debate with your partner and you have lost. This happens when vegans make fun of their debate opponent. As a result of seeing their ideology crumbling in real time. 

Reductio [ad absurdum] (the vegans' favorite method to "win" debates) is [usually] not an argument. Reductio can help vegans promote their mission by pretending to "win" a debate. But is not logical. There are two reductio definitions: one is legitimate - a contradiction. The other is illegitimate - "your argument is absurd".  The vegans usually "win" a debate (in my personal experience) is as follows: vegan: NTT. me: I believe that you don't distinguish between humans and animals and that you would eat them both. I am amoral. I don't believe there is any morality, hence there is nothing "wrong" with anything, including, eating a human. vegan: ha ha, reductio!!! That is absurd. Most people would view this as absurd. Look everyone at how immoral this person has become just in order to feast on animals - he justifies eating humans. Ha ha!!! At this point, the vegan has lost the debate for a few reasons. One of which is that the vegan has stopped engaging with his interlocutor and is now addressing the audience. Another is that the vegan poses that "most people...". That is an ad populum logical fallacy. 

Veganism is suboptimal. This means that if we compare 2 identical universes - one that is vegan and another that is non-vegan - and we do the accounting in a happiness balance sheet (pleasure vs pain) - then we can demonstrate mathematically - that the non-vegan universe - is happier. 

Cockfights are preferable to killing newborn male chicks. Let roosters fight. Let people have Cockfights. This would give people a reason to raise roosters. Instead of kill them at birth. 

Debunking the need for a quantum gravity theory (debunking the black hole singularity). This is founded on an analysis of how black holes form. That is - in a super-nova explosion - half of the energy is converted to the outer explosion that can be seen across the universe.  However, half of that very same energy must be pointing into the star's iron core. And is in the form of a shock (sound) wave. This sound wave travels towards the center of the core. And according to Einstein's General Relativity Field Equations - curves space time (due to the density component). As this curvature rises - a black hole is formed - within this very sound wave shell - that is the black hole. After a black hole is formed - the star's core - collapses into it. At no point is there a singularity. There is not division by zero. General Relativity never has to deal with quantum effects. 

Black holes cannot grow. Only the event horizon can grow. Whatever falls into a black hole, can never reach the center. As space time stretches faster than light inside the event horizon. 

Inside the event horizon is a plank size black hole. It never grows. As black holes cannot grow. Its event horizon can grow. But the plank size black hole cannot grow.

Inside the plank size black hole, there is no space time curvature gradient. So there is no spaghettification there.  

Black holes are the entry points into another universe. From the inside - we experience a white hole. The connection is an Einstein-Rosen Bridge (aka a Worm-Hole). Inside the black hole - there is infinite space-time. And hence due to Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle - the quantum seething foam - will create an infinite number of Big-Bang events - hence - a multi-verse. While from the outside - observers of the black hole - see the black hole as completely frozen in time. The inside dwellers of the black hole - see the outside universe as long since dead - evaporated away by dark energy and entropy heat death. 

No financial crisis has ever happened (2007/8, 1930, etc.).  By all metrics - covid is indistinguishable from 2007 financial crash, which in turn is indistinguishable from the 1930's depression. This indicates - that as the covid downturn was completely manufactured by governments having had shut-down the world economies - so did these other down-turns - were manufactured by government having had shutdown the economies. These events were never organic. 

Financial bubbles are a myth (because they are a violation of the rationality assumption). 

The Woke Mind Virus [I'm not trying to offend anyone - please read on] is the Zombie Mob Virus and is just the latest iteration of the Salem Witch Trials Zombie Mob Mind Virus and is a Great Filter solution to the Fermi Paradox. 

Global Warming™️ is unscientific. 

Scientific Consensus is unscientific due to conforming to appeal to authority and ad populum logical fallacies. 

Schooling (including home-schooling) is child abuse. 

The Education System™️ is a scam. 

Science™️ is a scam. 

Smoking [in moderation] might have many health benefits. Therefore should be recommended. Smoking [like anything else] can become addictive. Some benefits: Smoking is social - smokers often take smoking breaks with others - which has tangible health benefits. Smoking was invented by the American Indians as a social piece ritual. Smoking is a form of meditation for the mind. Smoking is a break from any activity. Smoking increases lung capacity. Smoking teaches the body to breath. Smoke is healthy.  

Humans are biological robots, they are a molecular machine. The only laws that govern human behavior ultimately are the natural laws. Currently science is aware of 4 laws: gravity, electro-magnetism, strong and weak.  Human brains are therefore also just a molecular machines. Humans are therefore deterministic, predictable.  And human preferences are nothing but the pre-programming of a robot. Subjective morality is therefore no different then any other mechanical behavior of any other machine or inanimate object.  

The Spanish Flu never happened. No one died of it. Rather, it was aspirin overdose that caused the high death rate.  That explains why military age men were its most common casualties. They were forced to overdose by the military. 

Covid pandemic never happened. No one in the history of the world ever died of Covid. Covid does not have the mechanism to kill a normal human. Of course anything can kill a dying human. So Covid did not change the average lifespan of humans. All excess deaths if there were any were due to government overreaction, panic and general ineptitude. 

Government is mathematically inept and should reduce its role to a bare minimum. 

The best scientific theory to explain the natural phenomenon of Oumuamua is that it is an artificial artifact of technological alien civilization origins.

You cannot be vegan and support the Covid jab. It was tested on animals.

Greta Thunberg is an international terrorist - she made actual threats in the UN: "my message is that: "we'll be watching you"... then you would be evil and that I refuse to believe but the young people are starting to understand your betrayal if you choose to fail us I say we will never forgive you. we will not let you get away with this. right here. right now is where we draw the line. change is coming whether you like it or not". These words are intended to sow terror in the heart of any politician. 

The vegan teacher is a terrorist - she posted that she "would be calling for a public ha__ing" of @cosmicskeptic for going non-vegan.

Vegan Gains is a terrorist - vegan gains calls non-vegans: "Nazis". Of course, calling people Nazis in the current year can have devastating effects on their lives. Hence, is effectively a terroristic tactic. 

@ask yourself is a terrorist - He changed my discord name to derogate me. He called me "Human holocaust denier", then "human holocaust agnostic (dumb)" and lately: "attention seeker (plz notice me)". His intent is to terrorize me and sow terror in the eyes of any onlooker: "see... this is what we vegans do to anti-vegans. so you better not be an anti-vegan or we will come after you.". He has harassed me many times when I posted invitations to debate me. He has of course refused to debate me multiple times. 

Racism is fake. Racism violates the rationality assumption. Hence, it cannot be true. Where racism is defined as: the hatred of another group for no reason. 

1+1=2 is not a true statement. "the sky is blue" is not a true statement. Math and logic are social constructs. Hence, they cannot be true. Just like a dog's bark, so too language, cannot be true. The value: true, does not apply to language. And math and logic are just languages. 

The family unit is unnatural. It is a byproduct of the neolithic revolution. Before that we lived in tribes. And we never know who our father was. Since the mom had sex with multiple partners. In hunter gatherer societies there is no word for "mother". The children are brought up collectively. 

Telling a child to clean his room or wash his dishes is actual slavery. Unless you negotiate with them a "living" wage. Be aware of the fact that some of the slaves were the children of the owner. Both in black as well as white slave owners. The owner bought a female slave and had children with her. These children were now his slaves. So slavery was basically child labor. 

Child labor should be legal. The child should decide if they want to work and under what conditions. Just like any adult. 

Democracy is unjust. Giving a voice to each person is like giving a share of a company to each person. Nothing in the world functions like that. Instead, the vote needs to be proportional to property ownership. If you are poor - you cannot vote. For example, in a family, the children don't vote. The father has the most say, the mom some, the kids can be heard. But the kids don't have equal votes as the parents. As the kids would destroy the family. Unless the kids go to work and earn as much as the parents. Then, fine. But also, the parents have saved up for many years and need to retire. And the kids are young and can be reckless. So it still makes no sense to allow the kids to vote equally. That is why democracy must fail ultimately. The reckless poor, will vote recklessly as they have less or nothing to lose. 

Raising rates cannot fight inflation. Raising rates can slow down the economy. How is that supposed to cause deflation/disinflation? What is causing inflation? If we don't know what is causing inflation, then we cannot guess a method to fight it. And raising rates is just guesswork. And it is evidently not having any effect on inflation. 

Punishing a child without negotiating the punishment with them is child abuse. 

Taking the phone away from a child as punishment is child abuse. 

Children should be encouraged to leave their homes if they feel uncomfortable and even become slaves in their new homes if that is their preference. Imagine what a child is experiencing at home if they prefer this. But if that is the case then we need to allow a child to run away from such a situation by all means necessary. 

Socialism and communism cannot work. Incentivizing citizens to not work, lowers the total productivity of the economy. Necessarily lowering the average quality of life. 

Equality is unjust. Paying the same wage to a hard worker and a lazy bum is unjust. 

Socialism leads to slavery. It incentivizes everyone to be lazy. And the only way to incentivize work is by force, aka slavery. 

Forcing children to share their toys is evil. Children should learn to negotiate. Each child should have their own toys which they earn just like adults do. A child who refuses to work for their toys, should not simply be able to leach off other kids' toys. Unless they can offer something in return. 

Hitler was a socialist. 

Central planning does not work. 

Causing a recession cannot fight inflation. 

There is no banking crisis. The banking regulators are over anxious to panic because they are paid to panic. That is the problem with government regulations. It is just the old principal-agent problem from game theory rearing its ugly head yet again. 

If you really believe in climate change then you would support murders and genocides. 

If you claim that you believe in god-creator then you are lying. The reason: god is unknowable. The very notion of the beginning of the universe cannot be understood. Ever. This is not a technological issue. 

If you claim that you believe there is no god then you are lying. For the same reason above.  

There is no "speed limit" in the universe. We are now traveling faster than light as observed from the opposite side of the universe. 

The particle wave duality is utter nonsense. Light is a wave. There is no need to think of it as a particle. The photoelectric effect can be explained with waves alone. The double slit experiment can be explained by wave theory. 

Antisemitism is a self promulgating (feedback loop) Darwinistic natural phenomenon. 2,000 years of Christianity and Islam have genetically engineered the jooz to be greedy bankers. Since jooz could not own land but could lend money with interest, they were Darwinistically naturally selected for the greedy banking genes. This increased their IQ, egoism, pragmatism, same group adhesion, suspicions of potential dangers, lowered their risk tolerance, increased risk aversion, increased their ability to communicate with their peers world-wide creating an international network of jooish bankers, quick to run away in face of danger and selected against self-sacrifice, generosity and altruism. Antisemitism created the jooz. And this natural phenomenon (known as "the jooz"), creates antisemitism. The intricate rituals of Judaism are just a signaling mechanism designed to defend the greedy bankers from greedy infiltrators. 

George Soros is an actual Nazi. He admitted that as a 14 year old he was an active complicit member of the Nazi machine. He was confiscating property from jooz. He should be tried and executed for his crimes. 

NASA and the moon program were directed by Von Bronn - an actual Nazi. 

If you lose a debate and you don't change your mind then you are a liar. 

The purpose of a debate is to change the mind of your opponent. If that is not your intention then you are not debating your opponent. You might as well just give a speech about your position. 

Our fear of AI will cause it to evolve into a dangerous AI.

Socialist and Communist regimes always degenerate into authoritarian poor countries with mass starvations BY DESIGN. It is the only way to control a population. If you are hungry, you are not thinking about freedom. And you would tell the authorities about your neighbor who is having too much to think.  It is not a coincidence that socialist and communist (e.g. stalin, mao) regimes ended up in mass starvations. 

Fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) is "green energy". Fossil fuel is dead trees. When we burn trees, we are recycling their carbon back into the air from where it came (not too long ago - less than half a billion years ago). Burning fossil fuels causes the greenification of the earth. 

By stopping me from murdering all vegans - you are no longer a vegan. Since I am an animal. And since a vegan does not cause distress to animals. And since I am distressed when I am not murdering vegans. Therefore, you are not a vegan if you stop me from murdering all vegans. 

If a vegan avoids being eaten alive by alligators then they are no longer vegans. Since by avoiding being eaten, the vegan is distressing the alligators. 

Wild fires are caused by trees. If we stop growing trees we will not have wild fires. Trees are a flammable material that we cannot afford to have nilly willy everywhere. A tree here and there is fine. But more than that is asking for trouble. There is no benefit to having so many trees. Like everything else, we need trees in moderation. Modesty in trees saves lives. Not just human lives. But also animal life. Save lives - destroy all forests. 

Wild fires are caused by lack of controlled fires. We need to have more controlled fires. We need to reduce the amount of trees. More controlled fires = more lives saved. 

Wild forests need to be cut down as to create bold patches. This way if there is a wild fire, it cannot spread as easily. 

"Trust the science" is counter scientific. Reason: the basic tenant of science is skepticism. So "Do not trust the science" is more inline with the principles of science. 

The "petro-dollar" is a conspiracy theory. No one is forcing anyone to buy oil in dollars more than any other trade. People and institutions prefer holding dollars because the US dollar is the most stable currency. 

Veganism is utter nonsense. Reason: veganism is not a scientific theory. Veganism does not make any verifiable claims about the universe. Veganism is not falsifiable. Therefore veganism is devoid of any meaning. Therefore veganism is utter nonsense. 

Veganism is utter nonsense. Reason: veganism claims to be ethical. But there is no objective morality/ethics. Therefore veganism is as ethical as nazism (a$kyourself conceded this https://youtu.be/avpw6XXH5pY?si=6v-O_eNRelCO5WBg&t=5982). Which means that vegans concede that nazism is ethical. lol:) which makes veganism utterly nonsensical.

Veganism and nazism are actually entangled:
"Albert Speer (in his memoirs, Inside the Third Reich)—noted that Hitler used vivid and gruesome descriptions of animal suffering and slaughter at the dinner table to try to dissuade his colleagues from eating meat".
The following sounds like it came right out of an ETHICAL vegan's mouth: "several eyewitness sources maintain Hitler was a vegetarian because of his concern for animal suffering, noting that he was often distressed by images of animal cruelty and suffering, and was an antivivisectionist." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler_and_vegetarianism]

Proposition: Ethical Veganism is utter nonsense [aka reductio ad absurdum]. Reason: ethical veganism claims to be ethical. But there is no objective ethics. Therefore veganism is as ethical as n&zism. Which means that ethical vegans concede that n&zism is ethical. which makes ethical veganism utterly nonsensical. If an ethical vegan claims that ethical veganism is ethical then they would have to concede that a n&zi officer r&ping a little 4 year old j&wish girl in her a&&ho&e and then pushing her to her de&th in a g&s ch&mber is ethical.

Veganism is a threat to humanity. Vegans are altruists. As such, they prefer the good of the "other" over their own good. The logical extension is the good of the "other" species over the good of "my species". 

Vegans prefer to destroy all life in the universe. Reason: vegans want to minimize suffering. The minimal suffering is accomplished by ending all life in the universe. Including artificial life. 

Plastic is natural. Plastic is derived from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are fossils of natural creatures. Therefore plastic is natural. 

Fossil fuel is natural. Fossil fuel is nature's solar energy. 

Humanity is doomed. Humanity will end up like north korea. Everyone is taking notes. Soon, one by one, all countries will be taken over by ruthless dictators. They will keep the populous in constant starvation, illness and abject poverty. The closer a citizen is to the leadership, them better his life is. This gives a strong incentive to protect the regime. No other country can change this status. The populous is held as a hostage. From game theoretics point of view - this is a mathematical inevitability. As can be seen, the north korean people are in a state of silence. This explains the great silence. All alien civilizations are kept in this state for all eternity. 

FTX was not a Ponzi scheme. 

Elizabeth Holmes did not commit fraud. Reason: she never sold her shares. So she actually believed in her idea.  

Proposition: Israel must re-annex Gaza.  Reason: Israel withdrew from Gaza. Since then Gaza has become a terrorist state. Israel must roll back this withdrawal and reoccupy Gaza. I'm not looking for justice. I'm not looking for retribution. I'm looking for an optimal solution to a conflict. This proposition is such a solution. 

The latest attack on civilians proves the importance of the second amendment and that government is inept. 

Israel should shut down its operantly utterly useless army. If anyone makes a threat against Israel only then should israel put together an army. Then, israel should go and destroy whoever made the threat. Then israel should occupy their land and declare it annexed to Israel. Then israel should dismantle its army and everyone should go back to work. The soldiers who went to war should receive the conquered land and all the war spoils.

If you want jooz and arabs to live in seperate countries (israel and palestine) then you are literally a racist (akin to jim crow era). jooz and palestinians are both human. they should live together (as they do in israel right now). 

vegan gains gives human rights but only to sentient animals. so in accordance with his NTT (name the trait) he should eat non sentient humans. well. he doesn't. lol. probably because if he did - he would be executed. lol. 

Burning fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) cannot cause global warming in the long run. Fossil fuel is ancient carbon based life (such as dead trees). When we burn these, we are recycling their carbon back into the air from where it came. Reintroducing this carbon back into the air will just increase the mass of the biosphere. It will not change the CO2 concentration in air. Assuming: long run and enough land and sea available to accommodate this biosphere's growth. 

proposition: vegan gains is wrong about science. Vegan gains thinks "a peer reviewed article in a journal is scientific evidence". it is not. it is just a reference. It is actually a logical fallacy as it is an appeal to authority and an ad populum logical fallacy. 

The "one state solution" is the best solution for the Israeli-Palestinian issue. It is de-facto - the current state of most of Israel-Palestine. In fact, the only part of Israel-Palestine where there are de-facto 2 states - is the Gaza Strip. And that is where right now, conditions are the very worst. And these conditions deteriorated from pretty-ok to an absolute warzone. 

Proposition: the freer an economy (where the economy is everything that has to do with our lives) is - the higher the quality of life (as measured by the happiness of the population). where free is free is of government coercion. 

There is no israeli palestinian conflict. All there is - is an interference of foreign powers in the relations of israel and palestine. 

The "what about the children" argument cannot be used. Unfortunately this argument has become weaponized (not by any one specific actor, but rather via darwinistic process/evolution).  Event this very proposition has become dangerous to discuss. So for example: "proposition: nudity is bad because it will harm the children" - is too dangerous to discuss. So if you bring up this argument - you are automatically disqualified. 

Axiom: If a proposition is not scientific then it is invalid. Unscientific is not part of reality. If we cannot perceive it then it is not real by definition. Except for this proposition. This is allowed because of the incompleteness theorem.  A scientific theory is a simple, understandable model of an observed phenomenon that we cannot explain.  A model is a 3 dimensional, mechanical contraption that can be easily built or programmed into a computer simulation. Or a mathematical equation such as in General Relativity. 

NTT (name the trait) is not a scientific proposition. Therefore NTT is an invalid proposition. 

The dark ages were dark because of the ultimate union: the Guild. 

A "source" is an appeal to authority. Asking me for a "source" is asking me to appeal to authority. It is a logical fallacy. I refuse to commit logical fallacies. A debate is not the time to do research. If you are surprised by the claims made by your opponent then you may ask for an explanation. If they don't offer a source that should not impact the discussion. You may assume the evidence is true. Or you may offer an argument to reject the evidence. But "do you have a source for that" is a logical fallacy.  

"Evidence" is not a source. Evidence is an experiment that was conducted. I might not allow certain experiments to be submitted into evidence. As I might decide that the objectivity of the publisher of the experiment's is debatable. 

Telling your debate opponent: "you need to look up..." is a logical fallacy. You may introduce any claims and evidence into the debate. But you may not refer to your debate opponent except for referencing any claims and evidence they introduced into the debate. 

Let's agree to disagree is a logical fallacy.

I should be able to make a legal transaction whereby I am paid to get murdered. For example: if a billionaire wants to hunt me like an animal, and pay me 1m$ for it, then we as a society should not object. Indeed, objecting to this is highly unethical aka EVIL. 

I should be able to sell my organs. 

Gun control causes violence. Which is the intent of government. In a perfect world, government has exactly ZERO role to play. So politicians need gun control for job security. 

popcorn 🍿 might scientifically save little girls' lives. 

if popcorn is scientifically proven to save little girl's lives then if you are anti popcorn 🍿 then you should be executed immediately. 

if a child refused medical attention then let it die.

if you claim to follow a philosophy then you are lying. 

evolution / adaptation needs genetic mutation (cosmic rays) but not sexual reproduction.  so asexual reproduction can evolve.  you cannot get a giraffe without mutations. 

best definition of life: that which Darwinian evolution can kick into effect in.  that scientific phenomenon which is best explained by Darwin's theory.  

immigration is bad for US citizens. because of diminishing returns. adding to the workforce does not linearly grow the economy. so each added worker produces less. therefore each immigrant must mathematically lower the average quality of life of US citizens.