What does Pol think of the current Molyneux and Weinstein Twitter spatt?

>her
he looks kinda like a tranny though

source?

He was raised Christian.

Beware the convert!en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomás_de_Torquemada

Molyneux is one of the more awake people. He's an eceleb sure. But who cares. He might be Jewish too. Again who cares? He would tell you those aren't arguments. Molymeme has been making these sorts of points publicly for like 13 years. What the fuck have you faggots been doing with your lives?

Let me just copy these walls of Texts and peer reviewed studies on a mongolian Basket weaving board. OR you can just debate JF on it. make your choice and pick your battle

No reason to get all butthurt and personal, Molymeme. Just go ahead and debate JF

Attached: 洞-beware-the-eternal-anglo-9365794.png (500x351, 44K)

I'm pretty sure jf said he believes out of africa or at least considers it plausible

Attached: 1524030060321.png (727x672, 667K)

weinstein is an idiot as seen with kavanaugh, but hes right in that it's not about being analytical here with molyman.

>now the Africans

All of them? Some?

doubt.jpg

yes that is an accurate description of what my dog picture conveys

With that intelligence, you sure are a world leading biologist

Attached: thXKYDWGDJ.jpg (474x619, 55K)

>Twitter
It doesn't make a difference because if you're on twitter invested in internet drama, you're not helping any cause. You're just a drone mindlessly wasting time and energy keeping up with twitter drama. But fuck the kikes obviously so I vote for molynux or whoever the white guy is.

Jackie Walker is herself a jew.
This is the usual situation where a bunch of jews take up every angle and all claim to be suffering from anti-semitism at each other's hands.
Then their friends in the military and politics slaughter a bunch of hapless goyim who were the original target all along,

It's all in their 'holy books'

If there's something that history teaches us is that it doesn't matter if a Jew is raised as an atheist, agnostic, jewish, christian or fucking buddhist: they always have the same subversive tendencies (E.M. Jones calls it "the Jewish revolutionary spirit").

Stefan is smart. But he's intellectually dishonest. And setting up an argument like his IS EXTREMELY intellectually dishonest because it requires the person debating him to do an inordinate amount of research, debunking of pop philosophy research studies that Stefan cites (none of which really stand up under scrutiny), and pull it all in without derailing. That's a lot of work for no pay-off other than patting yourself on the back. The attention span of the spergs who follow Stefan is so flighty that countering anything he says effectively takes three to four times the length of his argument plus research time. Also, who the hell cares if anyone believes his bullshit? Snake oil salesmen sell snake oil. And there's always been a market for it.

Yes, people who do less research obviously know more about the subject because they get to claim that the studies have been debunked with no evidence to back this up.

It's called research bias. "Hey, this is what I want to believe so I'm going to cherry pick studies that tell me I'm right."

But, again, who cares? It's the same retarded Molyfags on the 50th thread/day sucking his dick no matter what he says/does. Keep donating to freedomainradio.

>ecelebs

Anyone who listens to these people needs to rope themselves

who?

So the people who do less research and have no evidence can just dismiss all arguments they dislike as "research bias." Nice

Yeah man everyone knows that’s how you make an argument.

No. Not at all. But if I wanted to, say, make an argument that "all millenials are actually faggots" THERE ARE actual studies that I could use to make the argument that a.) sexuality is a spectrum, not binary and b.) the vast majority of people sampled through (x,y,z) studies claimed to fall somewhere on the spectrum outside of pure heterosexuality. Sadly, because there are quite a few studies I remember that make this assertion just from about 15 minutes of research in the "Research Methods in Psychology" course I took in 2005, I can tell you that this argument would hold water even though it's logically sound that homosexuality IS NOT a normative behavior no matter what population you're dealing with.

That is why debate is necessary. Debates are not arguments because they aim at convincing the audience.

Weinstein clearly does not adress Molyneux' argument and gets called out for it. He is the one being intellectually unsound.

>inordinate amount of research
What exactly is “inordinate” about supporting your argument with data? As far as I can tell, there are only two claims being made in his post. That whites are responsible for modern civilization (which there is plenty of evidence to support) and that whites evolved in different circumstances than blacks and other non-whites (again, a relatively easy thing to prove).

Weinstein is simply feigning superiority over the situation because he knows both points are true and is emotionally invested in his incorrect opinion.

Weinstein is being lazy. There's a difference. He should have just NOT interacted if he was going to be that lazy. And debates are NOT arguments but they do incorporate arguments (usually/hopefully). Convincing an audience IS Stefan's ONLY job. He can claim he's a philosopher. But his only actual job is to convince his audience to donate money. Everything else is just entertainment. So, if he makes some bold claim on Twitter (not a debate platform) and somebody replies with "lol, you're full of shit", the purpose of that interaction is to pull his core audience into saying "whatever! that's not an argument!" (his line) and that's a call-back to his primary purpose: to get his audience to donate money. That is Pavlovian.

Obviously stefan’s channel is also his business, but you’d have to be blind to not see that he does fanatically believe the ideology he advocates, for better or worse.

Can you please post a source or something? I want to see this myth destroyed and you're being a gaywad. If you're right, back it up.

Because the debater will be getting lured into disproving a negative.

Argument:
a.) whites created modern civilization
1. Define timeframe -- humans have been around awhile.
2. Define what constitutes modern civilization.

b.) whites grew up in a different environment than non-whites.

Please define white. Just caucasian? Which haplogroups? Did we get ancestry DNA for everyone who contributed to some major mathematical/scientific breakthrough that's responsible for modern civilization (sterilization, antibiotics, vaccinations)? Do patent laws constitute ownership of an invention or simply the first person to successfully file the patent?

I'm not trying to fuck with you on this or even to say those arguments may not be true -- there are just SO many questions that would need to be answered before beginning the research into anthropology, archaeology, contemporary history, etc., to refute or confirm it.

He is an entertainer. His background is acting. I have watched quite a few of his videos and have even donated and I DO appreciate a lot of his central tenets related to identifying past trauma (childhood or otherwise) and recognizing that trauma contributes to more trauma if not properly identified. However, you would have to be blind not to see that he is an entertainer first, a philosopher far second.

I'll agree that I don't see much evidence for a definitive conclusion that whites were "driven out of" Africa. I assumed molymeme was simply using a poetic turn of phrase with that, it smacks a bit of feeling sorry for oneself. Regardless, he's right that almost all major technological advancements were made by whites, and that white guilt is a preposterous and damaging meme being fed to modern society. Blaming whites solely for what the human race as a whole is responsible across millennia is disingenuous and unfair.

On the other hand, fuck all ecelebs.

Molymeme is a retard

Not an argument or reason why he's wrong.
>inordinate amount of research
Weinstein himself admits it would only take '5 minutes of reflection'. So what is it? inordinate or 5 minutes of reflection? If it's the latter why doesnt he just debunk it then and there.

Gaining back a little respect for Stefan "my grandmother was a jew" Molyneux

Attached: 1538567581975.png (1000x1000, 93K)

>1. Define timeframe -- humans have been around awhile.
>2. Define what constitutes modern civilization.
These are not questions specific to the argument and have no discernible ideological bias. In other words, there is no reason to assume that a white nationalist or an egalitarian liberal would have different conceptions of what modern civilization means. Most historians have already debated this and regardless of what slightly different metric one uses, the end result is largely unaffected.

>b.) whites grew up in a different environment than non-whites.
>Please define white.
This question is always so disingenuous. Europeans (as well as Asians and Africans) are part of a well defined genetic category. Sure, there are geneotypes that constitute a middle-ground between multiple races, but the differences between the races, in aggregate, are massive and distinct. It would be just as disingenuous to imply that specific colors do not exist simply because they all exist on an interconnected spectrum. It’s also interesting that this point is rarely raised against non-whites (i.e nobody will ever ask a black person to define African or an Asian to define Asian, because their definitions are self-evident).

And in regards to the question on invention, similar to the question on the definition of modern civilization, the metric used is irrelevant. We know the steam engine was invented in Britain, we know the automobile was invented in Germany, we know gunpowder was first formulated in China. Whether John Smith or Adam West patented it first is irrelevant. They were both white and no matter how you measure it, the vast majority of modern invention came from western civilization.

Attached: FE35328D-CCFB-4D0B-95FD-616260C8E984.png (1369x1057, 93K)

But Molyneux got the edge for calling out a jew for imposing third world immigration on Europe yet not Israel.

Molyneux called Weinstein's bluff and won. I agree with you, that now both their audiences can walk away from this feeling superior. Molyneux' because Weinstein didn't put his money where his mouth is and Weinstein's audience will continue to see Bret on the high horse.

Molyneux hasn't tweeted about white people. He posted about his ancestors. That something most Europeans share and so it is about people of European descent and their cultures.

>He is an entertainer. His background is acting.
Yeah, I know. He also refuses to run ads on his youtube videos out of a principled interest in keeping his message free from advertiser influence. It isn’t more or less entertaining for him to do so but it is obviously a less profitable business strategy.

This.

Out of Africa is the best supported theory by the evidence.

Why does the African origin of humans trigger you so much? Why does reality trigger you so much? You realise you're just making the right-wing look worse (stupider) by peddling conspiracy theory nonsense?

He doesn't have any because Out of Africa is the best supported theory. You can read about it here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans

He is just triggered by the best scientific explanations we have for reality, it seems. He's a special snowflake getting triggered, it seems.

Attached: ooa.jpg (1948x1688, 380K)

That first reply by Weinstein is pure pilpul.

Isn't Weinstein the guy who got gangbanged by his students on campus? But managed to placate them with "no no i'm a good jew i'm on your side"?

Except he's not talking about the human ancestors that arose from Africa. You're correct that so far the archeological record indicates a common source for the race, but Moly is talking about events during recent history, not tens of thousands of years ago.

Pretty sure Moly is talking about the Jews being driven from North Africa - ie. Egypt, not sub-Saharan Africa, he's referring to the 40 years in the wilderness the Jews always prattle on about.

Weinstein is saying that the Exodus, as detailed in the Bible, didn't happen - which he's correct, archeology doesn't support the events of the Bible at all.

You're dropping neckbeard mics, when you don't understand what they're talking about. Moly is talking about events in 1300 BC (allegedly), and you're talking about events in 300,000 BC.

the "intellectual dark web" is jewish neocons trying to keep white conservatives on the kosher plantation.

I always side with my own
It's what a jew would do

Attached: SlyRat.jpg (378x437, 33K)

shut up jew

shut up kike

yes

2 Jews that will be ovened once we get into power.

Someone who believes the events of the Bible and the Torah really happened isn't "woke" in the slightest, you bandwagon humping retard.

this

>studies that Stefan cites (none of which really stand up under scrutiny)

Of all your shitposting, I'm asking you to just prove this part definitively.

Why is the goddamn map inverted. Makes it harder for the layman to figure out what is going on

Well it’s a sound hypothesis is what I’ve heard JF say too. But it’s not like he absolutely fundamentally believes it like kikes and their puppets do.

>disparities don’t arise from oppression
Isn’t oppression every niggers excuse for being a stupid losers?

>Weinstein claims modernity would have occurred without white people.
Literally no uncontacted tribe of brown people have invented the wheel. They are all retarded abos.

Devon Stack makes decent vids but he's a hypocritical faggot. Have you seen his video where he chastises his viewers for banking at large banks, being Amazon prime members, not quitting their jobs etc? Meanwhile he sells his book on Amazon, monetizes his jewtube videos, has a Patreon etc. I lost all respect for that faggot after that.

Daily reminder that the Jews will talk at length about the "ashkenazi high iq" and use it to dismiss theories about jewish nepotism in government and private industry then do a complete 180 and deny that iq is genetic the moment anyone starts discussing the differences between whites and blacks. The jews do not argue in good faith.

>Modernity would have happened without white people.
Oh I am laffin.

Programming, this is just so you level the ideas in your heads as having equal validity, Then you will discard it as something that cannot be solved, Job done.

Whos getting more likes on twitter?

unpopular opinion: JF sucks at race realist debates when it comes to substance and ryan faulk and sean last know way more than him but unfortunately ryan faulk is shit-tier at rhetoric so he shouldn't debate either.

sean last should be /ourguy/.

Molly is so clearly trying to get banned to get some spotlight.

Bret is a brainlet, his brother is much more erudite and interesting.

Yea, look at all those wakanda cities in africa.......

Where are the stats they show most blacks hate whites?

another j thinking "wow just wow" suffices as an argument
and hes right because women and dumb people actually fall for it

it makes me hate KIKE weinstein and dumb thot Peterstein

this

Attached: 1511137180217.png (311x355, 18K)