Unbunja.. Lets talk on whatsapp.

boostdom:


Science and religion can not play together in logical arguments. Science and religion are diametric in logic. Religion is a belief system that can not be measured, thus it can not follow the metrics of logic.

Einstein was agnostic. He referred to himself as a "religious nonbeliever". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein Going by your earlier false reference to Einstein's religion, can we now conclude that Einstein was not a great scientist? Correlation does not imply causation. None of Einstein's theses or theories was harped on or via religion.

If you claim humanity started out as incestuous, and you allude to the origin of humanity as being a product of creation (religion), doesn't it imply that the origin of incest arises from the first creations of humanity?

Do you even know anything about the chains of premise and conclusion? You seem poorly informed.

dont argue with me just for the point of arguing.
0.if to you a scientist cannot believe in God then thats your own issue.if to you science is opposed to religion then too bad.coz the wisest man in the World was Solomon and he was religious.science and religion are best friends to honest seekers of truth.
1.what is Einstein's greatest most qouted statement?: " God doesnt play dice with the Universe". which God was he refering to if he didnt believe in one?
here is the full paragraph on Eisntein's religious beliefs:
"Einstein spoke of his religious outlook in a wide array of original writings and interviews. Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.[129] He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve.[130] He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",[131] preferring to call himself an agnostic, or a "deeply religious nonbeliever". When asked if he believed in an afterlife, Einstein replied, "No. And one life is enough for me."
key statement:"im not an atheist."

2.if Eistein wasnt a great scientists then i dont know what great scientist means anymore
3.here is where you are forcing me to repeat myself.you say

boostdom:

If you claim humanity started out as incestuous, and you allude to the origin of humanity as being a product of creation (religion), doesn't it imply that the origin of incest arises from the first creations of humanity?

dude you are confusing yourself.that other guy talked about the roots of the incest TABOO lying in religion.not incest itself. im the one who said Incest began mankind.but i corrected that guy who said i said "the incest taboo began in the bible". incest and incest taboo are 2 different things.incest is an act.taboo is the disapproval of the act .

true science pulls you closer to God.if your science makes you an atheist throw that thing into the bin.its Fake Science.

rickyamos:
Unbunja.. Lets talk on whatsapp.

whataspp is too real world.what happens on the net must stay on the net.i have avery strong Conspiracy Theorist roots.very paranoid.

But with continous practice and time a beta could become a badboy and even more cocky than a natural

ubunja:

you dont pay me enough to make such a siggestion.

U ain't worth shit then.

Jobesi:

U ain't worth shiit then.

so stop wasting your time with me.
keep walking.

.

rickyamos:
But with continous practice and time a beta could become a badboy and even more cocky than a natural

in my opinion betas will go further through studying female nature rather than going PUA. pua's are only memorizing techniques and phrases.and should a gal act in a way or say something, they didnt expect they get tongue-tied and freeze.
personally when i understood the Animal Side of women thats when i started to get chicks.i didnt even have to think hard. or memorize lines.i just "talked to a gal's pvssy" so to speak.the pvssy always wants the diick.her mind is the CockBlocker. so boost the pvssy's power over her mind by turning her ON. (some guys do this by using sex drugs on the gal.dont do that. use dirty talk and explicit language) .later with her friends she'll be saying "i dont know what came over me".
.i presented that understanding in my "Women Have 2 Hearts" post.

I once complimented a girl in a sexually explicit way on her body and she told me she was already wet.. I want to start useing sexual inuendos when carrying out a normal convo with a chick

insightful teaching

ubunja:

YES.real badboys dont need Game.
Game is nothing but Betas mimicking Original Badboy behaviours.Game is about hacking the women's preference for Badboys and making oneself appear to be a Badboy.
Badboys dont need Game.their very nature is appealing to women without practicing concepts and drills.and Game is about studying Badboy nature and using different tools to effect women like Badboys do.
i tried to explain it my post :"The Story of The Red Pill" here is the relevant section:

thank god for this...so happy reading it because it coming from the guy who teaches game on NL.....to all of you learning some stupid games for women, you are all Losers, your master wrote that.

lilwetdick:


thank god for this...so happy reading it because it coming from the guy who teaches game on NL.....to all of you learning some stupid games for women, you are all Losers, your master wrote that.

This girl tho.

Keep trying my sister. Maybe one day someone will actually listen to you

ubunja:
incest sex is illegal in 99% of the world and is forbidden Biblically and Scientifically.why is this intercourse taboo?whats the harm in two beautiful siblings playing a game of babymaking?what can possibly go wrong??well, A LOT.

imagine 2 empty plastic bags each with a hole but IN DIFFERENT PLACES if you wanted to carry sand in each plastic the sand would leak in the holes of each bag.but you can put one bag inside another and pour sand in, the sand will successfully stay inside without leaking.and you can carry the sand.coz though each bag has a hole,the holes are at different places and so each hole gets covered by the other parts of each plastic bag. THIS IS A BABY YOU MAKE WITH A STRANGER.its healthy.its encouraged.and the baby will be perfect.

now imagine 2 empty plastic bags each with a hole AT THE SAME POSITION.if you wanted to carry sand in each plastic,the sand would leak thru the holes in each bag.this time, unfortunatley, since the bags have holes at the exact place on each bag,now putting one bag inside another wont help you. the sand will still leak coz the holes in the bags correspond and sand gets to pour right through the holes.THIS IS A BABY YOU MAKE WITH A FAMILY MEMBER.its not healthy.its discouraged.its illegal.the baby will have a high chance of being disabled.

when God told Adam and Eve to multiply and be fruitful He fully intended for them to make babies that would grow up and have sex with each other and make more babies and repeat the process till sufficient population size is achieved that will make incest unneeded.

a poor man can be given 2 cows to build his wealth.those 2 cows will have calves that will grow up and reproduce among themselve.in a few years his kraal will be full and he'll be rich. noone sees it as immoral.and the cows dont get disabled. this is becoz of 2 reasons. 1.nature is NOT fallen like humanity.nature is still operating under God's original plan. 2.animal DNA has not suffered as much damage as the human DNA.

its been 6 000 yrs since Adam fell.and over the centuries human DNA has suffered damage due to sinful unhealthy practices and environmental factors like pollution etc.all of us are carrying DNA that has is damaged.no human with pure DNA exists.all our DNA has defects.these are the "holes in the plastic bag" from my examples at the beginning.these defects are not immediately seen and are Recessive.they are there but have not found "expression" in an offspring.they are silent. when 2 strangers make a baby each brings their own imperfect DNA that has "holes".the man may be carrying DNA that have an eyesight problem.his wife's DNA may be carrying a hearing defect. when these 2 make a baby the baby wont have an eyesight problem or a hearing problem.coz just like the holes in the plastic bags are at different places they cover each other.so likewise the man's DNA will cancel out or cover up, his wife's DNA's hearing problem while his wife's own DNA will cover his own DNA's eyesight problem.the problems in each DNA is corrected by the other DNA.and a baby born to them would be perfect.

but when a sister and a brother make a baby it all goes to sh!t. since these 2 are from the same parents and carry exact copy DNAs.if their father had a DNA defect affecting legs it means both are carrying that defect.but it was Ressesive coz their mother's DNA corrected/over-written that defect since our DNAs are all damaged BUT in different places. when a sister makes a baby with his brother they both bring DNA damaged at the same place.and a defect doesnt get cancelled out or corrected..so their baby comes out with their father's legs defect.this would not have been the case had the sister made a baby with a stranger.since the stranger's DNA would be different from hers.her own defects would cancel out the stranger's defects while the stranger's defects cancels her own defects in the process.its a help me while i help you mutual situation.so their baby is born perfect.

theoretically 1 man can repopulate the world since his sperms come in sufficiently huge numbers.but scientifically it wont be easy.coz all the babies he will make will carry the same DNA defects that will be recopied over and over again and make defective babies.
humanity escaped this fate coz Adam was in moderate perfection DNA-wise when he started the human family.

cheers

My first time of seeing this post. But nothing from Ubu is old really.

The write up is logical in some way but begs the question.
Did Chinese and east Asians originate from Adam? assuming Adam is even true in the first place.

Why are East Asians not defective?

Powerful families like the Rothschild have married siblings and their children were not defective instead children in northern Nigeria got defects. Why?

Finally, in the face of some evidence that man evolved from lower animals, where does Adam's story stand?

Why does Adam story not exist in any lore or religion if East Asia?

Why are Chinese brilliant and powerful even when they marry siblings?

ProfessorHank:


My first time of seeing this post. But nothing from Ubu is old really.

The write up is logical in some way but begs the question.
Did Chinese and east Asians originate from Adam? assuming Adam is even true in the first place.

Why are East Asians not defective?

Powerful families like the Rothschild have married siblings and their children were not defective instead children in northern Nigeria got defects. Why?

Finally, in the face of some evidence that man evolved from lower animals, where does Adam's story stand?

Why does Adam story not exist in any lore or religion if East Asia?

Why are Chinese brilliant and powerful even when they marry siblings?

Dude already claimed he is no biologist, though.

Direct your questions to a geneticist!

ubunja:

whataspp is too real world.what happens on the net must stay on the net.i have avery strong Conspiracy Theorist roots.very paranoid.

Good move.

Seeing some of the ignorant, hateful responses to your amazing insights, it's better off remaining anonymous, except to a few knowledgeable folks.

The rest of them here will troll and waste your valuable time. Don't feed them.

Ok