Fat is a type of crazy

I think you are getting a bit excited about the covid stuff. Your point was specifically the following: The mRNA shots will prevent you from catching Covid. That was billed and heavily promoted as a scientific "truth." I don't recall ever being told in Australia that getting the vaccine would mean I would not get covid. I was always told, and had known from previous vaccines, that it means if you catch it, and have had the vaccine, it is a lot less worse. It may have been also said that there is LESS likelihood of catching it but I do not recall hearing it would actually prevent you getting it. As I said maybe it was said in the early period. I do recall the controversial issue being around whether a person should have to get vaccinated as it made it safer for others but that is a separate issue. If you can show me that all the major medical bodies made your claim throughout the covid epidemic, and not just early on as I stated where errors were made, then I will accept what you are saying. Please do and I can learn something. Fun fact: I was a big fan of Ayn Rand at one time. Her direct and somewhat extreme right wing economic views and opinions on personal freedoms and approach to life were refreshing in The Fountainhead. Atlas Shrugged got a bit much and I saw that you need a heart and being so hardcore is in the end not a good way to treat fellow humans. Ask yourself : if you showed her the Seth stuff what would have she said. Doesn't mean it's wrong but see how it appears to others when by your own admission the evidence is subjective at best.

He's not popular with the Smiths - if I recall you are a big fan. Fun fact they've told him to stop playing 'Please please please let me get what I want' at his rallies without permission.

OK. Leave it there. You say you validate to the extent you can - so you're either not totally sure and you accept the theory is a theory only or you say it is definitely true and then faith is involved. Simple point. I am not sure why it is important for you to seem so sure of yourself that your theory is correct. The covid point, which in the big picture is not a lie, is that you used it as an example of science not working when science is by definition a self correcting mechanism and the vaccine had been clearly ultimately successful backed by scientific studies and not simply by someone's subjective notions.

Claims that science now has a lot of things wrong, and that scientists would likely disregard evidence of non physical forces if there was evidence are your claims, are unproven red herrings and do not help in backing up your theory. Science by definition never says it is undisputedly right of course. You have used as an example of your mistrust in science claims about the covid vaccine being a cure. Early on maybe the odd scientist, and a few politicians, misspoke and said it would prevent covid rather than lessening it's effects. I never had the impression the vaccine was a cure. So, because things were learnt on the run, and the messaging was not perfect, you seem to throw the baby out with the bathwater and somewhat put aside the clear scientific success of the vaccine. So let's set aside what others are doing or not doing or who is immovable and stick to your theory. The comment on meditation related to other posters. I have not studied consciousness. Your reading and personal experiences have led you to a theory - but that theory can't be explained succinctly similar to how a business could be explained as per your example - and apparently can't be proven, by direct or indirect evidence, at this time. The notion that evidence might come from followers of your ideas, possibly having objectively similar outcomes, is not acceptable to you. Maybe some other form of secondary evidence is acceptable. Faith is not a dirty word. I think we all have a type of faith at times in this and that to get through the day. You could one day be proven correct. If you have a theory that works for you based on readings and subjective experiences, but accept it may be wrong, then to me that's fine. Some of your writing though indicates you are sure it is correct which by definition requires faith.

People have such small cameras now that you'll never know so you have to cop it. Don't want to be filmed there don't go there.

There are many unknowns about how consciousness works but you have not proven conclusively that there are non physical forces - not even close. We all have thoughts and a consciousness but there is no evidence that it is not reliant or a product of our physicality. One of your key claims seems to be that non physical forces can control the physical world and that an individual can influence their life and or surroundings through these non physical means. As I have noted, if direct physical evidence is not possible, you should seemingly be able to provide statistical secondary evidence to back up your claims. Followers or adherents of your doctrine or ideas, could show specific and possibly unusual or surprising outcomes in their physical lives, that came from these non-physical concepts e.g. we are not sure why there is a link between A and B, or what forces are at play, but clearly A leads to B. Next steps may be to see if you can gather evidence or alternatively live your life happily in your faith that to you these are self evident truths. But in my opinion criticism of those that doubt, on the basis that they don't have your faith or that they can't comment without 10000 hours meditating or reading 1000000 words, is not a fair way to make an argument. You need evidence.

At one stage in the video I think he mentions 120 people are watching the livestream. Not too shabby outcome for him. I think it picks up on that cultural divide where in their mind they are being super polite yet come out seeming a bit arrogant and a bit petulant - especially where he shouts at him for touching her on the flag.

Theory: Uttradit is Bignok is Sparktrader Evidence for: Lots of short posts. Sometimes a bit rude. Started a topic about a small Thailand town. Evidence against: Mentioned a wife and her owning a house. Conclusion: Not sure

His take on things are sensible and likely accurate for those who don't believe in a god or for those like Thaibeachlovers who see a god as there but hands off. Of course denying that there are objectively human rights as part of the ether is not to say human kind cannot decide that life is better if we introduce human rights as laws. I have not seen the WEF have an anti human agenda. I have seen some cynics misinterpret on purpose things attributed to them such as 'You'll own nothing and be happy' which was one obscure speaker talking about the sharing economy and in no way suggesting or dictating how things should be beyond this.

Suppose if Trump falls over De Santis can maybe start it up again. They all seem to use the term suspending the campaign. Or would Hayley win automatically if she has some points from a win in New Hampshire or something. Interesting.

Could be some of those journalists, who get fact checked and stand by their words, see things you don't see. A compliant tourist looking at a panda or a wall or eating yum cha might not see what goes on behind the smiles of the government and the army and police.

Focusing on the working person for a minute. I get that at times some on the left, mainly the young which is nothing new, may seem a bit precious and care about issues rather than the working class but I don't see that with Biden. Biden supports unions. Higher wages. Lots of jobs right now. Efforts somewhat successful to reduce inflation. If it was 2016 you might be forgiven for thinking Trump might shake things up in favour of the working man - but what did he do in 4 years. Tax cuts for the wealthy. Promises on healthcare but all he tried to do is remove support measures. No push for better wages. It seems like bravado, and attitude is what his fans like, even if it has no substantive action behind it. Or he can talk about freedom and the border and guns and how bad the left is and ...words words words ... and that satisfies his supporters. Let's talk specifics - he benefited low and average income working people by ....

Not sure what those acronyms are

I saw a story about how they import a lot of unhealthy foods in a lot of south pacific countries including fatty salty meats, a bit spam like, doesn't help.

A few points: There is a logic to removing the Electoral College - those mobs you talk of are voters - too much power in the hands of the Dakotas - it is open to debate - I see some Hillary comments on this from long ago but no secret plan to make it happen. Few if any major economies didn't have significant inflation - maybe Japan due to weak household consumption. Unions have been hugely beneficial to workers and many American industries would benefit. Look at Thailand to see how the worker gets ripped off without unions. Like any group power corrupts and powerful unions can have issues. I may not be as one sided as you think - I can see an argument for some Republican policies - it's the Republican politicians that are atrocious. I can see arguments that in one way January 6 was mainly a group of charged up nobodies who turned into a mob and had no bigger plan in mind. I can see that say the valuation of properties charges could have a political element. But many of the current charges, including those related to January 6, appear well reasoned and valid and show Trump has a half assed doofus with no moral sensibilities. It's not an interest in Trump that keeps my interest - he is a bore - 3 minutes of his speeches and I've had enough - it's that so many seemingly normal and or intelligent people can support him. It's bizarre.

If you like rugby and drinking kava it might be your cup of tea.

Presumably confusing Haley and Pelosi. Not that Pelosi was at fault. His fans won't care. Sad.

Hey I was going to write a long reply as I strongly disagree with these old chestnuts you bring up - comparing a couple of comments from Hillary, who is not Biden, to Trump's over the topness, linking Afghanistan to Ukraine somehow, comparing a totally unrelated riot in Kenosha which Biden had nothing to do with, to January 6 - at the Capitol no less - which Trump was clearly responsible for etc etc. I will give you the economic point that inflation is a killer for all sorts of reasons and workers, including myself in Australia, aren't impressed with being told they can't have wages keeping pace or it causes more inflation - always workers pay in the end. But that's world wide and if you think Trump would have had lower inflation or been a friend of the worker with higher wages then that's fine. I could wax lyrical further about this but ...

I had problems adding to your post Mr Gamma. I did consider whether to do a long cut short post but it was targeted to Big Star in particular so had to reply to his range of points. But I’ll take your feedback on board.

You can be a thing or alternatively have tendencies towards a type of behaviour that is that thing. Most are in the latter category and surely have a bit of self awareness to seek treatment or manage symptoms. If he is the full narcissistic package maybe it is a lost cause.

Thanks for that. The following may seem like stock standard anti Trump stuff but here’s my opinion. Can’t go with the notion of Trump as simply a tad more extreme or the loudest monkey. I note, for example, that in the article about denying election results there is a clear difference between some somewhat valid comments and questioning of say the 2000 Florida result, that may be churlish at times but with no serious attempt to take the issue further, compared to Trump’s ongoing straight out outrageous refusal to accept that he lost based on nothing, leading to January 6 etc. I notice many who talk of Biden’s failings look in terms of poll numbers rather than what he has achieved – possibly because of the clearly strong economy. Inflation will always affect polls, and it hadn’t been helped by some early Biden spending and the effect of Biden’s strong economy, but had been overwhelmingly a worldwide problem brought on by the Covid spending, and is now coming down. There have been failings . The border issue is serious. I note too that, after your Afghanistan article, Biden did of course leave, though no doubt the withdrawal was botched. Biden’s age and communication skills impact his polls and prospects. In the latter part of your thread we clearly part ways. To seemingly describe Biden and the Democrats as lying thugs, who have to be addressed by utilising the rule of law, seems incredibly ironic. I suppose some see Trump still as someone, who despite a bit of bravado and nonsense, is deep down smart, and that is interests are consistent with the best interests of the nation. The alternative view is that it is not overstated or deranged to see him as a potential threat to democracy and the rule of law. That’s a whole separate topic. Take two examples though, January 6 and the fake electors scheme, and his treatment of highly classified records. If he had sufficient smarts, and control over his narcissism, he would have seen both were actions had been highly dangerous, and doomed to failure due to the dumb and hopeless way he went about things, causing himself and the country serious and unnecessary problems to deal with in the future.

I admit it is difficult because no one has stuck their neck out but nominees could be like Gavin Newsom or Pete Buttigieg or Amy Klobuchar - they all have their baggage I suppose.

If I am understanding it right 1 is bad for the older worker and 2 means more taxation for those on that income between 168 and 250. Australia has a different system in terms of social security - you don't contribute - it is means tested when you get to 67. This is what I mean by being in the middle. On the one hand I think there should be a reward for those who work hard and save hard so they can retire independently and I can understand it irking some to have to pay taxes to support others who haven't done so. But on the other hand I think there is some fairness to share the load around and make sure people can retire at a reasonable age with dignity. So somewhere in the middle.

Added 'Democrat' alternatives in case the confused person thought I meant Republicans being the alternative.

Yes. Open to being a Republican if they stuck to the economics with a bit of heart thrown in but there's always so much nonsense that goes with their side of politics. I consider myself in the middle in Australian politics which is to the left in American terms. I like Biden and his policies except get confused by things like immigration. I sense in these pages the democrat leaning posters including myself sometimes are focusing on the anti Trump, which is easy fare, and not acknowledging that Biden has done well but, I could be wrong, four more years will be a very difficult sell to the electorate and Democrat alternatives make so much more sense.