crazy4lsu
| Favorite team: | USA  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 39571 |
| Registered on: | 5/4/2005 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
In the sense the OP uses it? As in something rhetorically convincing or plausible. The reference by itself is not impressive nor would it count as something convincing to my eyes.
0
re: Impressive support for Intelligent Design
Posted by crazy4lsu on 3/12/26 at 5:19 pm to TheMonTSteR
Because this vignette is confused in a phenomenological sense. I could make a description of something unique to a species like how the frog sees or olfactory receptors in whales and use the same relational language to things like a computer which might make things seem fantastical and thus beyond the ability of science to comprehend. For example, the genes encoding mammalian MHC molecules are so polymorphic that they have 1.7 x 10^24 combinations or so, which is an incredibly large number and implies infinite combinations. But we understand clearly the method by which this recombination occurs. If we don't make a relational analogy for it, it might be meaningless. If I said, it would take you something like 31 trillion years to spend 1 x 10^24 amount of money if you were given 1 trillion dollars every second, perhaps you might understand the scale. But that isn't a meaningful description of the scientific processes. Likewise, this passage makes a bunch of relational analogies, which seem impressive only in relation to other things. The human body is decidedly not a computer and thus making references to the brain's 'wattage' and how insufficient current neural networks are in mimicking or even making a 1 to 1 scale representation of the human brain is certainly not evidence for 'intelligent design.'
There is nothing in the passage that shows that supports any notion of ID, unless you know nothing about biology.
There is nothing in the passage that shows that supports any notion of ID, unless you know nothing about biology.
re: The war is no longer about oil. It is about physics. And physics does not negotiate.
Posted by crazy4lsu on 3/12/26 at 4:54 pm to EvrybodysAllAmerican
quote:
They will get their hands on nukes through their European takeover much faster than developing one themselves. Those are the weapons we should be keeping an eye on.
What?
quote:
This book may be a worthwhile read for anyone interested in the topic. Cancer Care: The Role of Repurposed Drugs and Metabolic Interventions in Treating Cancer
I started reading the first PDF and the first table directly states that Ivermectin modulates the Hedgehog signaling pathway, and I don't think there is any evidence at all for this in humans at least. It might be the case that AI hallucinates this, as they do state that these tables were generated by AI. Not a great start for this document though.
quote:
1. This has been a particularly brutal regime.
2. The people of Iran have been exposed to modernity.
Yes, this has been a natural reaction to using a state religion. Even still, the regime has a lot of very devoted supporters. The Iranians I've met in the West are almost exclusively atheist though.
quote:
seems to be working well then
I can see why you and SFP admire them so..
Have they capitulated? And grow up you toddler. I am stating a fact, that they built their defensive network to operate independently. Otherwise, shut up.
re: Seemingly lost in all this Iran BS is they refused to stop developing nukes….
Posted by crazy4lsu on 3/10/26 at 1:08 pm to wackatimesthree
Great, but they are still some way from a bomb.
quote:
so have we.
We've prepared for a scenario of invading Iran with the goal of displacing the IRGC?
quote:
I meant strategically. They have to prepare for a lot scenarios.
They have. Mosaic defense, death by a thousand cuts, their porcupine defense strategy, which combined with the terrain means that they are limited options for displacing them.
quote:
The IRGC is relatively small.
It has a large paramilitary component which numbers in the millions. Everything about this adventure suggests a high cost which the US is straight-up not willing to do.
quote:
The enemy doesn’t know either
But the IRGC is prepared for one scenario. Whether they know exactly what we are doing is not important when they've spent 40 years entrenching themselves.
quote:
We need to completely eliminate the IRGC and leave their regular army in place and hope they’ll allow a government that’s more palatable to our interests be in charge.
That isn't going to happen without actual boots on the ground. The IRGC has spent several decades making themselves inseparable from the Iranian state itself. They control key sectors of the economy. Again, this isn't all that different from a country like Egypt in terms of the military's importance to the state. It's just that the IRGC is separated by even another layer between the regular military.
re: Seemingly lost in all this Iran BS is they refused to stop developing nukes….
Posted by crazy4lsu on 3/9/26 at 6:45 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
Yes
Of course you would believe that. But they are still some way from a bomb. Although this whole adventure has discredited the moderate wing, thus I expect them to pursue the bomb if they survive this.
Yeah, you right. Instead they will invoke the Crusades like they know anything about that. It’s insane that we learned so much in these last 20 years and will just decide to disregard it based on the assurance that ‘this time will be different.’
quote:
What the frick does chasing militias have to do with regime change.
As in, boots on the ground are required for what we claim to want.
quote:
I must have missed something in 2016.
Yes, that these groups all fought in the SCW and against the Islamic State.
Yeah, again, I fail to see how air support alone is going to dislodge several Shia militias or keep them from operating by itself. Let alone how it’s going to actually cause regime change in Iran.
What is more likely is that we try air support alone, it doesn’t work, and we are back having this conversation in 2036 just like we had this conversation in 2016 and 2026.
What is more likely is that we try air support alone, it doesn’t work, and we are back having this conversation in 2036 just like we had this conversation in 2016 and 2026.
re: WSJ: Iraq Becomes Battleground for U.S. Forces Once Again
Posted by crazy4lsu on 3/9/26 at 12:26 am to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
I am confident I have a better grasp on the type of Islam practiced in that part of the world than virtually everyone else on this board
We gonna make this board like those old Syrian Civil War discussion threads in 2017.
quote:
With many previous wars (Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan), rules of engagement haven't permitted a pursue and destroy strategy.
I fail to see how we can achieve this without boots on the ground. That is the point of difference, it would appear.
quote:
The Shia. Tell me more about this schism.
Several sects. Ismaili's were probably the most predominant until the Safavids converted their empire to Twelver Shia. In terms of jurisprudence, the most hierarchical and coherent among Muslim groups.
quote:
Maybe then tell me how a small cabal of wahhabis create all the “infighting” amongst the Sunni, Shia, and the rest of the world.
Who said this? The origins of the targeting of Shia Muslims came in the context of a larger Turco-Persian rivalry, with most of the targeting coming in South Asia after the conversion of the Safavids. The Hanbali school was much smaller and limited to the Gulf until the 20th century or so, representing the general trend of sidelining Arabs from the more dominant Turco-Persian culture that dominated the Islamic world after the Iranian Intermezzo.
quote:
I’ll hang up and listen since you think you are talking to Jethro from Jimtown. Salute!
Sure thing.
quote:
Now that we are in Iran and Iraqi borders are not giving them protection, they become part of the whackamole strategy.
Bro, the PMF have been integrated into the Iraqi Armed Forces. The terrain favors the exact strategy they want to employ.
quote:
This war is different when the surrounding Middle East countries are not demanding shelter for these pop-up skirmishes.
It's very early yet. It's hard to say this war is 'different' in any character if the commitment is to keep boots off the ground.
quote:
And no one gave a shite after the Crusades, until OIL
That is a terrible understanding of history man. The Eastern Mediterranean and the Levant has been contentious for centuries. That isn't instructive for this particular moment, unfortunately, given that one, we have a long-established history with Shia militias, and two, they are a direct reason why the US adventure in Iraq is largely considered a failure. I guess we will have to be fighting these dudes until the 2050's and also pretend at the same time we can bomb them into submission.
Again, these militias did not always exist. And now they do. And we are fighting them for more than 20 years now. There is no Hadith that can explain away this pointless exercise.
Yeah that is a non-answer. These militias fought us during the Iraqi Insurgency, were against us during the Syrian Civil War and have the potential to turn this into another clusterfrick. Just another pointless exercise for little gain.
Popular
22
