[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 27 KB, 317x474, 41E3KHQXFKL._SX315_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11072790 No.11072790 [Reply] [Original]

How scientifically accurate is CoQ? and how seriously should one take it ?

>> No.11072804

>>11072790
bumping OP for interest.

>> No.11072809

>>11072790
>history is a science
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>>/his/ anyway or /sci/ if you really want some laffs lad

>> No.11072819

I think it really comes down to your views on epigenetics, evolutionary psychology, and evolution more generally. MacDonald is ultimately making strong claims about how the cultural role of the Jews shaped their behaviours at the level of genetics, and vice versa. This is by no means a crackpot, fringe theory, but how sympathetic you are to that viewpoint depends a lot on how you interpret these epistemologically thorny issues more generally.

However, I think a lot of the people who are interested in Kevin MacDonald think of him as making only a cultural argument for Jewish nepotism, hegemony, and parasitism, namely that Jews have "evolved" toward a parasitic culture by having all their norms and institutions selected for by the contingencies of being despised outsiders.

I would advise you not to listen to people who act over confident in throwing out MacDonald or his strong claims for epigenetics and evolutionary psychology. Like I said, these are hotly contested issues right now, in fact they have been for a very long time and the epistemological fault lines are simply becoming more active. There are probably major reversals on the horizon in terms of what constitutes mainstream science on Darwinism/evolution.

But even if you aren't interested in this evolutionist account of anti-Semitism, which many of MacDonald's critics at least plausibly accuse of being a pseudoscientific gloss to justify MacDonald's foregone conclusions about Jews, you still have to make up your own mind what you think of the "soft" thesis that Jewish culture has evolved to be what MacDonald describes. And if you end up buying it, or parts of it, ask yourself what it means for your worldview. Maybe it's possible to agree with MacDonald that the Jews are, lets say, "defensively oriented" within "host societies," but this is actually understandable and benign? Maybe the net effects are minimal? Maybe it's not a centuries spanning process but varies greatly by region, local culture, and time period, and maybe it's even present in other ethnicities and minority communities.

>> No.11072820

>>11072790
i haven't read his argument in detail but from what i skimmed he was making a group selection argument, which are always pretty suspect / downright impossible. imo ignore all the evolutionary theorising and just focus on the historical facts he presents, then make ur own conclusion.

>> No.11072823

>>11072820
addendum: the cochran-hardy-harpending thesis of ashkenazi IQ having undergone strong positive selection is far more rigorous and parsimonious for explaining jewish dominance of many fields.

>> No.11072840

>Evolutionary psychology
>Not science

>> No.11072853

>>11072820
>ignore all the evolutionary theorising and just focus on the historical facts he presents, then make ur own conclusion.
This. Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years Together is a lot better and more objective examination of the problem.

>> No.11072854

>>11072840
lord knows it's better than sociology but that isn't a high bar. there are a lot of silly things that come out of that field. i don't think they're very smart.

>> No.11072855

>>11072823
Not really. The 10,000 Year Explosion is an important book but in relation to jews it ignores that the behaviors they exhibit today were present long before the bottleneck. MacDonald's general thesis is sound and CofC is a must read for whites.

Link to the Culture of Critique:

https://archive.org/details/TheCultureOfCritiqueAnEvolutionaryAnalysisOf

Link to the aforementioned Cochran's blog:

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/

>> No.11072871

>>11072854
Who are you referring to? Modern scholars? Trivers, who essentially founded the field and is the basis for much of not only MacDonald's work but Pinker's and Dawkins' as well, is one of the most important scientists alive. And I doubt the field is actually given much real leeway academically, seeing as how jews have made race the foremost taboo subject in the west.

>> No.11072874

>>11072855
>for whites
this schizo is immediately identifiable every time by his chronic use of "whites" phrases

>> No.11072887

>>11072871
most of the theory is poor: like most evolutionary anthropologists, they mostly borrow evolutionary theory from biology textbooks, but rarely produce any of their own. this means they tend to be about ten years behind the cutting edge of evolutionary biology. I suspect if you asked such folk who hanna kokko was (imo the #1 person studying sexual selection theory right now, but maybe I’m behind, too), many couldn’t tell you, but they could tell you all about trivers’ theory from the 70s – which I believe most behavioral ecologist don’t believe anymore. trivers is a genius, but times change.

another problem is what you might call intellectual founder effect. a few folks basically laid down the law in the 80s and 90s, I think, and it seems to be largely unchanged today. so there are a lot of unusual features that seem to arise from the idiosyncratic beliefs of the founders. i think this is where the obsession with a universal human nature (or just two: male and female) and “mental modules” comes from. this is probably true of a lot of subdisciplines, though.

>> No.11072891

>>11072819
> the cultural role of the Jews shaped their behaviours at the level of genetics
Is this what is meant by epigenetics? Can you give an example of an "epigenetic" fact for me to demonstrate what that is? I hear this word thrown around a lot in the whole culture vs. genetics debate.

>There are probably major reversals on the horizon in terms of what constitutes mainstream science on Darwinism/evolution.
Have any recommendations for getting up-to-date on this debate?

>> No.11072894

>>11072855
>behaviors they exhibit today were present long before the bottleneck.

i'm sceptical.

>> No.11072899
File: 293 KB, 540x718, F5CD79B4-5F1C-4574-8FA1-73D7A73615E6.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11072899

Why do we keep having a thread about this fucking book every week
It’s alread been disregarded by every respectable institution

>> No.11072902

>>11072891
>Is this what is meant by epigenetics? Can you give an example of an "epigenetic" fact for me to demonstrate what that is? I hear this word thrown around a lot in the whole culture vs. genetics debate.

it's basically a kind of lamarckian inheritance, which has not been shown to exist in any appreciable form in humans. we can make it happen under controlled conditions for mice, and there's some suggestion that major events famines cause minor epigenetic changes in the generation after, but the whole idea is generally a magnet for bad theories. 99% of the time "trangenerational epigenetics" is a magical incantation you can invoke to explain any group outcome you want, like an epigenetic legacy of slavery causing blacks to score poorly on tests today (somehow the chinese children of the survivors of the Mao era have no such difficulties). i'll believe it when the proponents actually put in the work to demonstrate these differences instead of just asserting them.

>> No.11072907

>>11072902
>demonstrate these differences
*demonstrate that these differences actually are mediated by transgenerational epigenetics.

>> No.11072910

>>11072899
Hey bub, how's it going. hate to break it to you but that's a common fallacy people make. a fallacy means your argument doesn't follow from your premises or is one-dimensional in some way. for example, the fact that someone holds a view and that view is correct are two independent notions. unless you establish they are dependent in some way, you can't reasonably appeal to one as a warrant for the other., hopes this helps friend

>> No.11072916

>>11072899
t. brainlet

>> No.11072917

>>11072887
>most of the theory is poor
I completely disagree, think it's beyond obvious, and have been following this field for over a decade now. But jews mass report these threads so forgive me for being reluctant to type out an extended response.

I don't know what 80s and 90s research you're referring to either. The problem we're dealing with is group differences that result from differing evolutionary environments being an unacceptable discussion topic. And the reason for this begins and ends with jews controlling the environments in which such discussion could and should exist.

>> No.11072922

>>11072910
this is true, but on the other hand there's a difference between logical implication and probability. if a group of renowned experts, known for getting things right a lot, say that a theory is wrong, then for the layman that is strong evidence that the theory actually is wrong, but not proof. we use these sorts of appeals to authority all the time because otherwise we'd never be able to operate in the world.

the real problem is how to you tell a real expert from a fake one? hth friend

>> No.11072924

>>11072894
Perhaps you should read about jews in ancient Egypt then. The behaviors they exhibit today are nothing new.

>> No.11072930

>>11072917
well that's the whole problem; most of the evolutionary psychologists don't want to talk about group differences at all. they think that there's a single unitary human nature, and they're wrong. they also have a bunch of weird hobbyhorses like sperm competition, when all the evidence shows it just doesn't matter in humans.

of course kmac is different but that doesn't save his theory from having many other problems.

also you should understand i'm not dismissing evpsych as a field -- i think there's a lot of insight to be mined from it. they've certainly got their heads screwed on tighter than many other fields i could name. it just suffers a lot from being a kind of ghetto, and it doesn't attract many new talented people.

>> No.11072937

>>11072924
they weren't remarkable compared to other groups. romans didn't think they were especially smart or scheming; they were just another troublesome subject people that kept rebelling.

>> No.11072959

>>11072899
>It’s alread been disregarded by every respectable institution
(((respectable institution))).
I think the guy that wrote the book is an ideological crank and his book is pseudo-scientific garbage, but to expect serious regard by institutions on such a topic is just silly.

>> No.11072965

>>11072930
There's plenty I disagree with MacDonald about, naturally, since CofC is around 20 years old now; plenty he has amended as well. But he is spot on about jewish group evolutionary strategy, and that to me is where the discussion begins and ends. I'm happy to find someone who is actually familiar with Trivers, who forms the foundation here, but am also unsure what the issue you have here is.

>> No.11072967

>>11072790
>how seriously should one take it ?

If you want to be alienated as a crackpot anti-semite, then sure, go ahead and take it very seriously.

I honestly don't understand the fascination with Jews. They are literally 11 million people of a total population of 7.3 billion. They are practically as inconsequential as Armenians, and yet they garner the most absurd attention.

>> No.11072986

>>11072967
>I honestly don't understand the fascination with Jews. They are literally 11 million people of a total population of 7.3 billion. They are practically as inconsequential as Armenians, and yet they garner the most absurd attention.
>run or are involved in every major institution in the West, mostly the institutions that shape perception i.e. the mass media and entertainment industries.
>Potential U.S. presidents need to get on their knees and grovel to Jews if they want to become president

>> No.11072987

>>11072937
The jews took over Egypt and enacted policies that are remarkably similar to those they enacted while in power in Germany, Russia, and today's West via America. Whatever changes occurred within the Ashkenazi population during the middle ages did not make them into who they are today. Perhaps it strengthened those traits, but Cochran and Harpending were wrong in claiming that those traits were a product of that bottleneck.

>> No.11072990

>>11072987
>The jews took over Egypt and enacted policie
such as

>> No.11072996

>>11072986
So what, Anglo-saxons also rule every major institution in the U.S as well, but I'm guessing this obsession doesn't apply to them?

Never mind that a president of the U.S has literally never been a Jew, and a Jew has only been the Prime Minister of the UK once in its entire history.

Literally everything people like you whine about when it comes to Jews is doubly or triply true about Germanic peoples.

>> No.11073007

>>11072996
>So what, Anglo-saxons also rule every major institution in the U.S as well, but I'm guessing this obsession doesn't apply to them?
Why would it apply to the people that founded the country?

>> No.11073008

>>11072990
Read this article or the associated book for the details:

https://www.counter-currents.com/2014/06/moses-the-egyptian/

>> No.11073015

>>11072996
That isn't true, and jews are a foreign race anyway; they do not share the native inhabitants' loyalties and are extremely hostile to them. That's the problem.

>> No.11073018

Let me sum this book up as quickly as possible.

>Jews with their hubris admit that they control the world, based on thousands of pieces of evidence over thousands of years
>get called out on it
>OY VEY IT'S ANTISEMITISM
>b-but I can pull up quotes...
>SHUT THE FUCK UP FILTHY GOY

>> No.11073021

>>11073007
>Why would it apply to the people that founded the country?

Why wouldn't it?

>> No.11073028

>>11073021
It's self-evident

>> No.11073032

>>11073028
>It's self-evident

No it's not. The argument the book makes is that Jews are particularly predisposed to nepotism, which is wrong. There's literally no group on the planet that has been more nepotistic than the Anglo the last 200 years.

>> No.11073036

>>11073032
How can you be ethnically nepotistic in your own country?

>> No.11073039

>>11073032
>Jews are particularly predisposed to nepotism, which is wrong
Not him, but who are you trying to fool here? You realize the goyim have the internet now, right? Your scam isn't working anymore.

>> No.11073044

>>11073036
LOL, and this. Such obvious absurdity the best of us often forget about.

>> No.11073053

>>11073036
are you retarded?

>> No.11073055

>>11073036
>How can you be ethnically nepotistic in your own country?

When 13% of your population is African.

>> No.11073064

>>11073053
Are you?

>> No.11073098

>>11073064
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Anglo-Saxon_Protestant
dunno, tell me

>> No.11073103

>>11073098
Yes those are the people that founded USA I'm still not sure what your point is?

>> No.11073109

>>11073103
i'm pretty sure it's an example on how a group of people was ethnically nepotistic in its own country
was the usa 100% wealthy anglo saxon protestant untill after the ww2?

>> No.11073115

>>11073109
Do you understand what the word 'own' means?

>> No.11073127

>>11073115
do you understand what nepotism means?
here let me help you

>nepotism
>ˈnɛpətJz(ə)m/Invia
>noun
>the practice among those with power or influence of favouring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.
>"his years in office were marked by corruption and nepotism"

>until at least the 1940s, this group dominated American society and culture, and, although it did not control politics, dominated in the leadership of the Whig, Republican, and Democratic parties. They usually were very well placed in major financial, business, legal and academic institutions and had close to a monopoly of elite society due to intermarriage, and in some cases, nepotism.

again, was every american a wealthy anglo saxon protestant until ww2?
>b-but they built the country!!!
no
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn_Bridge

>> No.11073131

>>11073127
You still seem to be struggling with the concept of owning something

>> No.11073136

>>11073131
>owning a country as a restrict group
>in a democracy
yup you're retarded

>> No.11073141

>>11073136
>>owning a country as a restrict group
Yes that's generally how countries are formed

>> No.11073157

>>11073141
so, was an irish catholics or a german protestant rightfully ostracized from positions of power?

>> No.11073163

>>11073157
Did they own the country?

>> No.11073172

>>11073163
then why aren't you complaining about an irish catholics or german protestant descendant holding positions of power in 2018 america and rather choose to complain only about jews?

>> No.11073182

>>11073172
Because I'm not American

>> No.11073213

>>11073182
so you're telling me that if you were american you would complain that your entire supreme court (but gorsuch) is occupied by undeserving people? or that Kennedy was merely an usurper and that a much more deserving wasp should've been elected?

also which is the cut off point for being allowed to occupy position of power in a country?
let's talk about france
you need to have certified gauls ancestry? roman ancestry? franks ancestry? what if someone was born in the 2000 and his ancestor was a jew migrated there in the 1700, married a gentile and his grandfather fought in the ww2 under the franch army? how much "frenchness" there is in him?

>> No.11073218

>>11073213
>so you're telling me that if you were american you would complain that your entire supreme court (but gorsuch) is occupied by undeserving people?
I don't need to tell you anything when it's a fact all over the world that people feel concerned about foreign peoples occupying positions of power in their countries regardless of what group these foreign peoples belong to

>> No.11073234

>>11073218
The anglo-leadership clearly wasn't so concerned since they literally gave Jews power and let them into circles of influence.

>> No.11073240

>>11073218
so, is the supreme court of the us occupied by foreign people? was kennedy a foreign occupier?

>> No.11073243

>>11073234
How does that invalidate the feelings of concerns the proles have when foreign peoples occupy positions of power in their countries?

>> No.11073246

>>11073240
You tell me I'm not American

>> No.11073256

>>11073246
neither am i. i'm merely appling your logic to the real world and watching you trying to weasel your way out

>> No.11073266

>>11073256
In the real world people fight wars to regain control of their own countries. If I were a non-confrontational American who was only concerned about his own selfish interests I'd seek to actively suppress any feeling of identifying with a group beyond "American" lest there be a bloody civil war but unfortunately thanks to decades of accepting more than a million foreigners a year into their country it's now impossible to do that.

>> No.11073291

>>11073266
>American
define american
because here
>>11073103 it looks like to me that only anglo saxon protestant are the only real american deserving to own the country
using the official census
https://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/censusatlas/pdf/9_Ancestry.pdf
that mean that only a very minor % of the american population is actually the true owner of the country.
so should the american create laws forbidding to people of, lets say, italian or germanic ancestry, access to powerful position (either in the private or public sector)?

>> No.11073298

>>11073291
>define american
There is no "American" group because they now have nothing in common

>> No.11073321

>>11073008
Hahahahahahahahaha you're talking about Jews in Egypt in Exodus. I thought you were at least talking about diasporic Jews in Alexandria hahahahahahahahaha
You're honestly a fucking retard

>> No.11073327

>>11073298
so the "true american" doesn't exist? then why should a "white" (despite we learned white is kinda an incorrect term) american have more right to live in america than an immigrant from mexico or a jew?

>> No.11073338

>>11073327
In a historical context because they founded the country in a contemporary context they can't if they don't acknowledge themselves as being a separate group so instead they'll have to deal with what ever conflict inevitably ensues from that

>> No.11073387
File: 8 KB, 300x168, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11073387

>>11073338
but we learned that using your definition a very limited subset of americans "founded" america.
lets see what the anglo saxons thought of the italian

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Italianism
ummm "Italian Americans were branded as labor agitators and radicals by many of the business owners and the wealthier class of the time" "little worse than Negroes" "one of the largest mass lynching" "Teddy Roosvelt [...] said the lynching "was a rather good thing""
damn it look like american should deport italo americans

lets see the Irish
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Irish_sentiment
"Help wanted – no Irish need apply."
""ape-like image" of Irish faces to bolster evolutionary racist claims that the Irish people were an "inferior race" as compared to Anglo-Saxons."
"the Know-Nothing Movement tried to oust Catholics from public office."
damn it seems we're gonna need to purge the irish

strange, they are similar to claim made in 2018 against other ethnicity. it kinda makes you think, doesn't it?
anyway how should the population be divided in the inevitable conflict? a sort of Royal Rumble kind of thing? using pic related as a metric?

>> No.11073393

>>11073387
>strange, they are similar to claim made in 2018 against other ethnicity. it kinda makes you think, doesn't it?
No what is it supposed to be making me think? Are you implying it's impossible for people of the same racial group to see each other as being different?

>anyway how should the population be divided in the inevitable conflict? a sort of Royal Rumble kind of thing? using pic related as a metric?
That's not my problem I wasn't the one pretending groups don't exist and that you can form a country whose entire basis is on a shared love of money

>> No.11073428

>>11073393
>No what is it supposed to be making me think? Are you implying it's impossible for people of the same racial group to see each other as being different?
i'm implying that racial stereotype changes usually and usually target outgroups. somehow the italo americans are no longer seen as worse than negroes or the Irish as ape-like. are you implying a sudden evolution happened in 150 years? or maybe it's all bs

>That's not my problem I wasn't the one pretending groups don't exist and that you can form a country whose entire basis is on a shared love of money
every country is like that. every european country got its fair dose of pillaging and raping. also you can find in every single state at least 1 separatist movement based on ethnics or historical reasons. why don't we start chopping up all the european states then?

>> No.11073442

>>11073428
>i'm implying that racial stereotype changes usually and usually target outgroups
Yes I know
>somehow the italo americans are no longer seen as worse than negroes or the Irish as ape-like
Because they're not the groups that are being brought in en masse any more
>why don't we start chopping up all the european states then?
What do you mean start? It's being happening for millenia it's even happened this century. That's what happens when you force different groups to be brought together under the same banner and being ruled by people they don't identify with

>> No.11073460

>>11073172
because they don’t

>> No.11073501

>>11072790
It's very biased, mainly because MacD cherrypicks like crazy.
You could probably make a book like this about many other populations if you just carefully picked all the scummy things they did.

That said, there's surely some truth in there. Jews were in fact persecuted a lot and they're now hypersensitive about certain issues and want to make sure they survive.

>> No.11073545

>>11073442
>Because they're not the groups that are being brought in en masse any more
so we decide who we deport or gas based on who makes us feel insecure at the moment? nice

>What do you mean start? It's being happening for millenia it's even happened this century. That's what happens when you force different groups to be brought together under the same banner and being ruled by people they don't identify with
so do you support bavaria, catalognia, north italy, scotland , basque, etc. separatist movement?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe
because that mean europe is going to be a bunch of irrelevant little states with 0 power projection

>>11073460
k

>> No.11073576

>>11073545
>so we decide who we deport or gas based on who makes us feel insecure at the moment? nice
Only if you force people to live together and be governed by each other's differing interests otherwise the only conflict that will arise will be for competition for resources

>>11073545
>so do you support bavaria, catalognia, north italy, scotland , basque, etc. separatist movement?
Why do you compel me to support separatist movements I have no interest in just because I've presented you with the reality of European history?

>>11073545
>because that mean europe is going to be a bunch of irrelevant little states with 0 power projection
So? If they want to project power they ally if they want to live as their group likes to live then they separate this has been happening for thousands of years it's only you who seems to think nations are static entities and that people should be forced to live together

>> No.11073656

>>11073576
>Only if you force people to live together and be governed by each other's differing interests otherwise the only conflict that will arise will be for competition for resources
that's pretty much what every single state is. it's impossible to force everyone to have the same opinion even inside the same ethnic group

>Why do you compel me to support separatist movements I have no interest in just because I've presented you with the reality of European history?
maybe because you said
>That's what happens when you force different groups to be brought together under the same banner and being ruled by people they don't identify with
those are group that don't identifies with people ruling them. so you should support them using your own logic

>So? If they want to project power they ally if they want to live as their group likes to live then they separate this has been happening for thousands of years it's only you who seems to think nations are static entities and that people should be forced to live together
you understand that you can't peacefully secede from a state unless both part are ok with it?

>> No.11073667

>>11073656
>that's pretty much what every single state is. it's impossible to force everyone to have the same opinion even inside the same ethnic group
Having a different opinion isn't the same as having different interests

>those are group that don't identifies with people ruling them. so you should support them using your own logic
I don't have to support anything I have no interest in and even if I acquiesced to your demand nothing would have changed

>you understand that you can't peacefully secede from a state unless both part are ok with it?
You understand that's why conflicts arise as I said hours ago and hence why it's a bad idea to import millions of foreigners into a country?

Why do you take half an hour to make such asinine comments?

>> No.11073940

>>11072790
Did you forget that the word critique begins the letter C?

>> No.11074052

>>11073460
you are absolutely fucking retarded nearly every bank in Boston, Toronto, Scotland, Ireland, England is run by Irish Catholics, a massive number of financial institutes have Irish on their boards and Italians have huge sway in Central european banking, Bank of America was founded by an Italian. What a fucking retard, the Carlyle Group is majority owned by Daniel D’Aniello and Ray Dalio has the largest hedge fund in America. You’re such a fucking pleb
>>11072819
epigenetics isn’t real past 2 generations it doesn’t effect whole populations
>>11073007
if their iq is lower than nordic or jewish then it should apply, its about skills not numbers you disgusting populist
>>11072840
its not a science and he doesn’t do any studies you stupid fucking nigger its just a book applying “the tools of x” to his pet theory he already believed and cherry picked. he simultaneously believes whites are ultra competitive and precocious and also super kind and nice and empathic, jews are evil and close minded but also feminine and mercurial, open. its retarded whites aren’t individualists and haven’t become individualist to this day, there is nothing a white loves more than being in a room with other loud whites. just makes a series of idiotic sweeping statements. everything good is white: collective trust? white only, jews don’t
trust anyone (except of course whites don’t trust other whites or non-whites that’s why southern euros and slavs are treated badly); competition? whites are on that! except of course when its anti-social then they clearly don’t
do it, and this pattern of lunacy makes up the entire book. its pathetic

>> No.11074416

>>11073501
No one is buying this nonsense anymore. You jews are the problem and always have been.

>> No.11074437

>>11074416
That’s all he does though
There’s no real study, only him pointing out “ Hey that guy is Jewish”
It’s fucking retarded, anyone can do that

>> No.11074449

>>11074437
You are obviously jewish and haven't read the book. Stop posting on /lit/ you stupid semite.

>> No.11074453

>>11072790
It's evopsych aka pseudoscience

>> No.11074455

>>11074449
he doesnt do any scientific research its all just ideologically motivated historicism a la marxist interpretations of history of politics

>> No.11074461

>>11074455
You won't sway any but the weakest here, jew. Scram immediately.

>> No.11074477

>>11072899
i love two things
respectable institutions, and le vidya drawfag parody reaction images

>> No.11074561

>all these same jewish arguments
When you become used to seeing jews try to argue against jews being found out and called out for their constant lying, it's like some matrix slow-motion shit coming at you where you can see ten moves ahead.

>> No.11074786

Go to bed, Kevin.

>> No.11074802

>>11074786
Go to Israel, kike.

>> No.11074851

>>11074802
Get off the internet, shill.

>> No.11074872

>>11074851
You're going in the oven for real this time.

>> No.11075502

Bump

>> No.11075505

>>11075502
Why would you do that?

>> No.11075519

>>11075505
What's the problem

>> No.11075526

>>11075519
No one cares anymore, just let it die

>> No.11075608

>>11075526
Plenty of people care, and should care. But we know why you don't, kike.

>> No.11075612

>>11075608
Well no one is actually discussing your pseudo-science book with the amount of cherry picking it would make a farmer blush, so i'd say this thread is as good as dead
Don't @ me because now i'm going to sleep

>> No.11075640

>>11075612
You just ensured that it would be on at the top of the page when you check tomorrow. Get off /lit/ you filthy jew.

>> No.11075743

>>11075640
>>>/pol/

>> No.11076584

>>11072790
Has anyone here actually read this?