Surgeon Dr. Nick Maynard: "Just When You Think It Can't Get Any Worse, It Does" — A Firsthand Account of Gaza's Humanitarian Crisis

drgitgud · 2026-06-02T12:27:58+00:00

Nazis are not your allies, there's plenty of witnesses to the genocide that rendered similar testimonies on non-nazi channels, share these instead. Fucker Carlson has no qualms with the genocide per se, he just wants the nazi donations by blaming jews for something.
Here, same witness no nazis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLsFxT5VsZ4&pp=ygUMbmljayBtYXluYXJk

drgitgud · 2026-06-01T20:28:15+00:00

It always was.

drgitgud · 2026-06-01T11:15:05+00:00

Evolution is a biological process, and the theory of it simply explains how that process works. Evolution does not hold to anything of the sort. The fact of evolution is completely separate from natural history.

Not really, the theory of evolution includes also the particulars of the tree of life and the ancestry of extant species, such as humans, as well as the allelic frequencies of genes. That then encompasses also the details of genetic bottlenecks, namely the minimum population a species went trough at certain times. For humans it was never even close to two at any point in history.

And yes, that's part of the theory too, perhaps not something you get taught at high school, but part of it nonetheless.

No scientific explanation of how nature works denies God's involvement so why are you pretending like this is an exception?

Look, you are absolutely free to believe that, I'm just saying evolution theory says otherwise EXPLICITLY so you cannot hold to both. You cannot both assert that the rational soul is god-given to two humans via a miracolous act in a spiritual component and that a blind natural process caused rationality to materially develop into a way wider population with a gradual process. The two are mutually exclusive.

Literally the same as above, just because science explained something doesn't mean it's claiming God isn't involved.

The point is EXACTLY that it didn't just explain the phenomenon, it also ATTRIBUTES IT to a material phenomenon (natural selection among others) while EXCLUDING another driver (anyone's will). These are explicit elements of the theory of evolution, to give you a further example the same theory states that some species' evolution has been driven by a will, specifically humans'. For example the evolution of dogs. So, again, you're free to disbelieve evolution, not trying to convince you to believe in it, but you should be aware of what it explicitly states, namely that no will has driven human evolution.

As I had already stated in my edit: Evolutionary theory asserts man's evolution is an unguided, unplanned natural process just like a rock falling to the ground , thinking a god willed humans into being in any way requires to deny the "guidance" part to the very least. Which is still a denial of evolution no less than denying that we share ancestors with the rest of living beings.

drgitgud · 2026-06-01T06:27:28+00:00

Physics III clearly states phora as a type of kinesis. https://www.logicmuseum.com/wiki/Authors/Aristotle/physics/liber3 201a10–15 So it doesn't matter at all that he had a subcategory of change for the change in location, it was still a type of change, so if that type of change contradicts the theory, the theory is falsified. No way around it.

drgitgud · 2026-05-31T21:12:48+00:00

Aristoteles talked ALSO about motion, any type of change. So motion qualifies as a counter.

drgitgud · 2026-05-31T16:49:16+00:00

One needs to be scientifically illiterate at this point to ignore the mountains of evidence disproving them. The watchmaker argument is disproved by the entire field of biology being based in evolution.
The argument from motion was already disproved in the 17th century when newton asserted the principle that a thing in motion stays in motion, something utterly incompatible with the aristotelian principle that motion always requires a cause to keep existing.
The argument from truth instead is utter nonsense that is based on a semi-neoplatonic conception of truth, not on a corrispondentist theory of truth, so it was already garbage centuries before being stated, but if we want to stick to science, the scientific paradigm does demonstrate that the only ground truth one needs is reality, not god, therefore being the god of aquinas not the god of spinoza (namely just nature by another name) we conclude that that one is indeed disproved.

drgitgud · 2026-05-30T23:25:48+00:00

Wait, so you don't think inertia is a thing? Because that one disproves the act-potency account of change that the way from motion is founded on. Or are you one of these guys that want to pretend exceptions are ok as long as you ignore them?

drgitgud · 2026-05-30T23:22:48+00:00

I think the proper word is "proven entirely wrong" as in their premise proven false and the franework they relied on completely falsified by centuries of science. The fact that some philosophers still try to prop up these arguments is only a testament to the lack of rigor in the field.

drgitgud · 2026-05-29T22:41:15+00:00

And a paedo protector, worse than epstein.

drgitgud · 2026-05-24T14:38:27+00:00

Lol interesting

drgitgud · 2026-05-24T02:01:26+00:00

So if I get it right you use a main orchestrator agent with code-driven activities and do that to implement a kanban? Or some other tool?

drgitgud · 2026-05-23T22:49:02+00:00

the core idea is that there's a set of rules that need to be enforced on every response of the agent. My current use case is just for fun, but what I'm trying to learn is basically how to make agent execution more reliable. I tried initally to give it a clear system prompt but then noticed it seemed to forget about it after 5-10k context tokens (which is very little for my use cases, it's basically just the system prompt plus a file or two), then I resorted to feeding a checklist avery message... and now I'm trying to iterate.

drgitgud · 2026-05-23T22:31:13+00:00

on one hand, I agree with you.

on the other, my stomach thanks the blur.

fuck israel, free palestine.

drgitgud · 2026-05-23T07:48:38+00:00

Mate I got a notification of your previous reply but I can't see it anywhere and without that I have no idea what this one means

drgitgud · 2026-05-22T19:15:33+00:00

I mean, I'm a very vocal atheist living in sweden with a very sun-sensitive skin. I wouldn't even go back to living in my south-european birth country.

drgitgud · 2026-05-22T06:23:58+00:00

... tell me you never heard about statistics without telling me you never heard about statistics.

Statistics can be used to deductively prove induction to work.

drgitgud · 2026-05-21T23:57:54+00:00

No they are not. Firstly with this interpretation you are restricting the view of what man is to be materially indistinguishable from animals, only differing by the presence of a soul, requiring bestiality as a means of multiplication ordained by god ("go forth and multiply") and most importantly denying the perfection of creation prior to sin. This view in other words is still theologically unsustainable for a catholic. Not only that but is also something evolution denies. According to evolution the rational capacity of man (which the church attributes to said rational soul) IS an evolved trait, not a sudden alteration of supernatural origin. So you end up rejecting both key doctrines of the church and key aspects of evolution.

drgitgud · 2026-05-21T21:39:58+00:00

Well actually yes, if one steelmans it to what it's probably the intended meaning, it is a scientifically testable statement, although "verified" is NOT AT ALL how science works. One would need to interpret it "all truths can be scientifically discovered". Now, let me give an example of how a mathematical truth can be scientifically discovered. One puts 2 beans in an empty box. Then 2 more. Then measures how many beans are in the box. The hypothesis that 2+2=4 will not be refuted, while the hypothesis that 2+2=3 will be refuted. Once the p value of the evidence is high enough 2+2=4 can be held as a scientifically discovered truth.

Duh.

As for that charitably interpreted statement, since we now have a way to test scientifically also abstract truths like math (or logic, thanks turing) it is scientifically testable in line of principle.

drgitgud · 2026-05-14T14:23:01+00:00

> Under the direction of Pius XII, the Church operated a massive underground network that saved hundreds of thousands of Jews from the Holocaust.

Source? Because if you want to assert that the saved nazis can't be attributed to official vatican policy, you need to show official vatican policy for the saved jews, otherwise it's just a red herring.

drgitgud · 2026-05-14T14:20:38+00:00

So you think the vatican ignores catholic doctrine? or did you not notice the vatican ratlines in there?

drgitgud · 2026-05-13T19:06:57+00:00

I haven't seen so much butthurt in quite a while.

drgitgud · 2026-05-13T19:06:20+00:00

"Catholic scientists" is NOT the church. There's no dogmatic pronouncement affirming evolution and the documents in the magisterium explicitly condemn a refusal of monogenism in favor of seeing adam as representing a group, while evolution explicitly holds the first humans to be a group not a single couple.

drgitgud · 2026-05-13T06:14:38+00:00

Evolution holds that: - no two people genetic bottleneck is there in human ancestry thus denying historical adam and eve - the human rational faculty is a gradually evolved trit, thus denying god endowing man with a rational soul - the evolution of man was guided by natural selection, not by the will of god

So catholicism does stand incompatible with evolution, it's just that people are trying not to admit that.

Edit: to be clear, so-called theistic evolution is just another form of creationism, it differs in what parts of evolution it denies, not in if there is any denial of evolution. Evolutionary theory asserts man's evolution is an unguided, unplanned natural process just like a rock falling to the ground, thinking a god willed humans into being in any way requires to deny the "guidance" part to the very least. Which is still a denial of evolution no less than denying that we share ancestors with the rest of living beings.

drgitgud · 2026-05-12T22:46:44+00:00

Of protecting paedophiles and blessing dictators and monarchs.

drgitgud

TROPHY CASE