Sunday Scripture

Job 28:28

And this is what he says to all humanity: 'The fear of the Lord is true wisdom; to forsake evil is real understanding.'
 

Does "Drunken Monkey Hypothesis" Make Sense To You?

https://scitechdaily.com/research-supports-drunken-monkey-hypothesis-humans-inherited-love-of-alcohol-from-primate-ancestors/ 

Monkeys routinely consume fruit containing alcohol, shedding light on our own taste for booze.

For 25 years, UC Berkeley biologist Robert Dudley has been intrigued by humans’ love of alcohol. In 2014, he wrote a book proposing that our attraction to booze arose millions of years ago, when our ape and monkey ancestors discovered that the scent of alcohol led them to ripe, fermenting, and nutritious fruit.

A new study now supports this idea, which Dudley calls the “drunken monkey” hypothesis.

The study was led by primatologist Christina Campbell of California State University, Northridge (CSUN), and her graduate student Victoria Weaver, who collected fruit eaten and discarded by black-handed spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) in Panama. They found that the alcohol concentration in the fruit was typically between 1% and 2% by volume, a by-product of natural fermentation by yeasts that eat sugar in ripening fruit.

Moreover, the researchers collected urine from these free-ranging monkeys and found that the urine contained secondary metabolites of alcohol. This result shows that the animals were actually utilizing the alcohol for energy — it wasn’t just passing through their bodies.

Today, the availability of alcohol in liquid form, without the gut-filling pulp of fermenting fruit, means it’s easy to overindulge. The idea that humans’ natural affinity for alcohol is inherited from our primate ancestors could help society deal with the adverse consequences of alcohol abuse.

“Excessive consumption of alcohol, as with diabetes and obesity, can then be viewed conceptually as a disease of nutritional excess,” Campbell said. 

This hypothesis triggered my genetic memory, which had me daydreaming about the days when our ancestors would swim on the bottom of the ocean floor sucking up shark shit. 

In fact, the name of this blog is a commemoration to our aquatic cousins the carp. Without them, you wouldn't be able to read ideas on the internet. Without the carp, we would still be monkeys. Or wait, maybe it's without the monkeys we would still be vultures. I forget. Anyway, without our cousins the carp, we definitely wouldn't have developed a "drunken monkey hypothesis" to explain why humans like to drink alcohol. That much is for sure.

In all honesty, these two women are absolute pioneers in the realm of thought. I mean, how brilliant of them to come up with the idea to examine the urine of spider monkeys while on vacation in Panama and then be able to formulate the opinion that spider monkeys obtained energy from rotten fruit. 

This is a perfect example of why feminism is such a vital asset to WestCiv. If these women were at home cooking dinner for their children, they would have never been able to go to Panama and study spider monkey urine. And if they hadn't had the free time to go to Panama to study spider monkey urine, then we would never know why humans like to booze it up while watching black men run with a ball on the weekends.

You really just have to give it up to these ladies. Pardon me, these geniuses (no reason to mention their gender; we were all evolved equally).

This is the kind of Science! that paves the way for the future. Now that we realize that alcoholism in humans is just an evolutionary adaptation from our spider monkey ancestors - who ate rotten fruit to obtain energy; not to get drunk - we can quit thinking that alcoholics are a product of a nihilistic society. Then we wouldn't have to pretend that alcoholics are simply trying to escape their perpetual state of misery, rather that they've just taken their nutrition to excess. You know, like when a kid eats too much candy on Halloween. Or when a dog eats itself to death.

Since we know that the love of alcohol is written in our DNA (the DNA that we inherited from spider monkeys, not carp), we can treat any health problems that arise from excessive alcohol consumption as a nutritional disease. Maybe big pharma can develop a pill, or mRNA injection that acts like a diet drug or something. Perhaps they could test it out on spider monkeys in the jungles of Panama. Wait, that might be some kind of PETA violation, so scratch that. They can just do human trials.

Hopefully some female college students will eventually discover that rampant drug use is actually encoded in our DNA from some other species. For example, maybe our rodent ancestors ingested coca leaves as a survival mechanism, which would explain the crackhead phenomenon. They could even call it the "crackhead rodent hypothesis." The theory could be that rats who stayed awake longer after ingesting coca leaves had larger food caches, which enabled them to survive times of food shortages.

Obviously, "crackhead rodent hypothesis" is theoretically inferior to "drunken monkey hypothesis," because two college women actually studied spider monkey urine in the jungles of Panama in order to come up with "drunken monkey hypothesis." And I'm just spontaneously making stuff up on the internet while drinking beer.

Cheers!

   

Transgenders Are Created in the Image of God. But Which God?

About 7 out of every 1000 people in the US believe God got their gender wrong. Of those, maybe 1 or 2 even believe in God. 

How can you believe in God and also believe that he just put your soul in the wrong body at conception?

How did God make his mistakes in his image? Does that make sense to you?

Biden obviously didn't write that speech. Nonetheless, with all of the social issues in America going on, why this? Why the obsession with trannies?

The entire concept of trangenderism is suicide by proxy. That's what it is. And for people to celebrate that is kinda sick, tbh. These people need intense psychiatric therapy. Anyone who says anything different is a heartless liar who doesn't have any compassion for mentally ill people. That's the bigger story.

Instead, these out-of-touch elites, who have probably never seen a transgender person in their insulated lives (excluding the Jewish man who put on lipstick, a dress, and changed his name to Rachel so he could become the nation's first female 4-star general), tell everyone that these people are God-like. 

But why?

Is it part of a bigger plan to depopulate the earth?

Maybe American elites realize that there are some serious social problems going on, and they want to try to spin these societal ills as positives: "Oh, yea. America has really high drug overdose, suicide rates and everyone hates each other, but the tranny thing is a good thing. It's actually an American virtue that shows God is on our side."

I suppose encouraging people to commit suicide by not actually killing themselves is a good thing. You can just use modern medicine to cut your penis off, take hormones and kill the old you without literally killing the old you. It's almost like an immaculate conception for atheists. 

Hmm. Is that what this is all about? Humanism. People taking on the role of God? That kinda makes sense. Then they just use wordism like "image of God" and people assume they are talking about the Christian God, when in fact they aren't. 

Now I get it.

Cut The Cord Already: A Guide To Free TV

At this point, TV is just a source for social engineers to propagate their ideology.

It's indisputable that the programmers of television have an anti-white agenda. It has permeated every aspect of the modern television experience. In fact, when was the last time you saw a normal white man in a TV commercial (excluding erectile dysfunction and colonoscopy advertisements)? It's almost like it's taboo at this point to have a normal white guy in a TV commercial. There's absolutely no way that it isn't intentional. 

Could you imagine if TV commercial producers said, "Ok, guys. We are going to audition for commercial actors today, but remember, we don't want black females for any of the roles."

There just isn't any way possible that normal white men haven't been intentionally excluded from TV commercials. Yet, why hasn't the New York Times or Washington Post reported on it? I thought racism was bad? Or, are we to believe that they haven't noticed? That they're colorblind until it involves the systemic oppression of normal white men? Whatever happened to "democracy dies in darkness"? (wtf does that mean, anyway?)

Nonetheless, the point is, if you're so bored in life that you have nothing better to do with your time than to sit down in front of a television and be spoonfed anti-white programming, then at least don't pay for it. When you think about it, isn't that eerily similar to paying to have your ass whooped? Or to have you balls stepped on by a femdom in high heels?

Anyway, without further ado, here's your source for FREE anti-white indoctrination television:

For the digital minimalists, a TV antennae is both a cheap and an effective way to watch things like your local news. They're very inexpensive ($20) and don't require any technical talent. This is the preferred method, as you don't even have to subscribe to an internet provider.

The rest of the list are FREE streaming services (of note: "free" just means, "comes with anti-white indoctrination ads"):

YouTube:

YouTube is the latest company to offer free TV shows with ads. The video giant says you’ll now be able to stream nearly 4,000 episodes of TV for free, as long as you’re also willing to watch ads during the show. Shows available include Hell’s Kitchen, Andromeda, and Heartland, and you’ll be able to watch them in the US on the web, mobile devices, and “most connected TVs via the YouTube TV app,” YouTube says in a blog post.

Peacock: 

Wondering what you can watch for free? Here's a collection of movies and TV shows that are currently streaming for free on Peacock.

Tubi:

As of February 2022, Tubi's programming includes over 35,000 films and television series from over 250 content partners. These have included A&E Networks, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Gaumont Film Company, Paramount Pictures, Magnolia Pictures, Lionsgate, Skydance Media, ErosSTX, Bento Box Entertainment, Epic Pictures, Oscilloscope Laboratories, Sony Pictures, Constantin Film, Nordisk Film, Rat Pack Filmproduktion, Warner Bros., Studio 100, nWave Pictures, Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Your Family Entertainment, Shout! Factory, Nelvana, WildBrain, 9 Story Media Group, Boat Rocker Media, Bleecker Street, FilmRise, Bridgestone Multimedia, Wow Unlimited Media, Entertainment One, Regency Enterprises, Invincible Entertainment, Safier Entertainment, TriCoast Worldwide, Funimation, GKIDS,[32] Xilam, NBCUniversal, Viz Media, and Bob Ross Inc.

Since its acquisition by Fox Corporation, Tubi also carries programming from Fox Entertainment, local news from Fox-owned stations and affiliates, and Fox Weather. The service began producing its own original content in 2021, including television films and series.

Tubi uses a real-time bidding platform for advertisers that deliver video ads across various platforms.

Comet:

Comet draws from the extensive library of films and television programming owned by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and subsidiary United Artists, carrying more than 1,500 hours worth of sci-fi programming from the studio.

Crackle:

Crackle features films and TV shows, some of them on an exclusive basis, mainly from Sony Pictures and its subsidiaries, including Columbia Pictures, TriStar Pictures, Screen Gems, Sony Pictures Classics, and Sony Pictures Worldwide Acquisitions.

Crackle also features “Crackle Original” series such as On the Ropes, Going from Broke, Hidden Heroes, The Oath, and Snatch. Crackle's content changes each month as titles are added and taken down.

Pluto:

Well let's see. We could pen a historical essay about our 2013 origins. We could toss around numbers like 100s of channels, 400+ global content partners, and nearly 50 million global viewers*. We could even drone on about our huge library of on-demand content which spans across all genres of movies, news, TV shows, sports, documentaries, and blah blah blahhh...

But why complicate things when Pluto TV is, at its core, really simple?

All you really need to know is... it's free of passwords, it's free of payments, and it's free of all those Friday night spats about what to watch.

So just lean back. Drop in and enjoy the show. It's free.

While spending your time watching a television is unproductive and uber-conformist, at least now you can do it for free. 

 

Sunday Scripture

Job 25:1-6

"God is powerful and dreadful. He enforces peace in the heavens. Who is able to count his heavenly army? Does his light not shine on all the earth? How can a mere mortal stand before God and claim to be righteous? Who in all the earth is pure? God is so glorious that even the moon and stars scarcely shine compared to him. How much less are mere people, who are but worms in his sight?"

 

What Is A Woman?

After Stephen Breyer announced he was retiring from the Supreme Court in January of 2022, Biden fulfilled his 2020 campaign promise to nominate a black female for the position. While every rational person sees the problem with electing someone based on their skin color and/or gender, the nominee (Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson) should also feel somewhat disrespected for being chosen predicated on a campaign commitment to elect a black woman (not a particular black woman, just a black woman), instead of her professional and personal merit.

Not to out-democrat the democrats, but black female privilege literally got her nominated to a position when other marginalized groups are still lacking representation (Judge Clarence Thomas is black). Which means that without that privilege there's a 99.9% chance that she wouldn't have been nominated otherwise. In other words, if we're being honest, she's basically an affirmative action hire. That's not intended to be disrespectful, because if you think about it, how is it not just as racist/sexist to hire someone primarily based on their race/gender, as it is to disqualify them because of it? Is it not essentially the same premise? Nonetheless, privileges of any sort that are founded on race and/or gender don't represent American values. Isn't that what has been drilled into every American brain for the last 50 years?

To muddy the waters even further, during her confirmation hearings Jackson said that there should be more women judges. In response to that statement, she was asked to define what a woman is, to which she replied that she couldn't, because she isn't a biologist:

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said at her confirmation hearings Tuesday that more women should be on the federal bench.

But she stumbled when asked for a definition of “woman.”

In an exchange with Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Judge Jackson evaded the question when the Tennessee Republican asked her “can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”

Judge Jackson repeated the question before replying “no, I can’t.”

The senator asked her back, “you can’t?”

“Not in this context,” Judge Jackson replied. “I’m not a biologist.”

A disbelieving Ms. Blackburn then said that “the meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?”

It begs the question as to what she meant when she said that more women should be federal judges. Did she mean more people who identify as women, or more people who are biologically women? Because biology doesn't recognize men as women. Therefore, according to Jackson's response, she obviously knows that. So it will be interesting to see her future rulings when such cases arise.

However, therein lies the existential problem with the ideology of liberalism: it's a proverbial snake that eats its own tail. Judge Jackson wants more women judges, but she knows the hyper-liberalized system that enables radical feminism to flourish is the same system that doesn't define women biologically. Because you don't need to be a biologist to be able to define what a woman is; a 3-year-old could do that. So, it's not that she didn't know the answer, she just didn't want to say the wrong thing (yet she did anyway).

Some may find it comical that a woman nominated on the basis of womanhood doesn't know how to define what a woman is. But the more concerning issue is that this particular woman is also going be about as influential in shaping the social landscape of American society over the next 30 years as any person in the country. Not too mention that her ideas are going to be very persuasive with regard to how people define apparent abstractions like “woman” moving forward.

We know Judge Jackson leans heavily liberal, so it's rather obvious that her voting record will represent that (after all, that's why she was nominated, right?). Thus, her voting record will be considered controversial in the eyes of centrists and conservatives. This controversial voting record will illicit predictable conservative “gotcha” responses when hot-button rulings are passed down (e.g.,“Yea, well, what do you expect from someone who was asked in her confirmation hearings what a woman was and she said she didn't know because she was a woman, not a biologist.”). Sadly, it'll be yet another running joke (like the Jewish man who became the nation's first woman 4-star general and was named USA Today's Woman of the Year) attributed to the status quo that is America's liberal democracy.

Although liberalism is an ideology, it became tangible when it was implemented as a governing social system for Americans, which in turn manifested into the antithesis of its ideological purpose: it became hierarchical. One of the key components (if not the key component) of liberalism is feminism. But as you can see, the hierarchy of liberalism is even more oppressive to women than the patriarchy ever was. While modern feminism just created inferior men, neo-liberalism one-ups that by making men superior women.

Without the feminist aspect of liberalism, the patriarchy would likely still be thriving in America. Instead, feminists failed to foresee that by embracing the abstract idea that they were actually just men without penises, they ultimately opened the door for the other “men without penises” to become the new feminists. That's how ideology works when it isn't supported by logic and reason. Liberalism has devolved into the battle for oppression, and nobody is going to be more oppressed than people enslaved in the wrong body. Sorry ladies.

Speaking of people trapped in the wrong bodies, that very idea shows the destructive nature of ideology when supported by people in positions of power. The simple fact that you can convince unstable, suicidal people (the essence of transgenderism is suicide by proxy) that their soul/conscious was somehow misplaced by God/evolution exemplifies the upmost importance of integrity amongst our lawmakers. If the highest lawmakers in the nation don't know what a woman is, then legally how does a nation know what a woman is?

This brings us back to the heresy of Judge Jackson's statement about not being a biologist. Liberalism recognizes ideas over reason. More precisely, if biology was how we defined a woman, nobody would have asked Judge Jackson to define what a woman is in the first place. The biological definition of a woman has never changed. So she didn't just make herself look ignorant by saying she didn't know what a woman was, but she also deferred to biology as to the definer of gender, which is contradicting to her ideological worldview. More so, these are the kinds of problems that can occur when people are hired due to anything other than merit. A Supreme Court judge shouldn't be flustered by simple questions.

It's not known if Jackson's race and gender were influential in her admission to Harvard Law School, but Tucker Carlson has been vocal about democrats being tight-lipped regarding Jackson's LSAT scores (Law School Admissions Test). For all intents and purposes, those scores would give us a really good idea of how “great” her legal mind is. That's not to say it's not; maybe it is. But shouldn't the Biden administration want to show that they just didn't hire her because she is a black woman, but rather because she deserved it?:

“Biden, sounding maybe a touch defensive, has described Ketanji Brown Jackson as one of this country’s great legal minds. And we certainly want to believe that. For, for real, given that she’s probably gonna be confirmed no matter what we think,” Carlson said during his Fox News show on Tuesday.

“The question is, is it true? Is she really one of this country’s great legal minds? One way to know, one indication would be her LSAT scores,” Carlson continued. “The LSAT is not a knowledge test. It measures logic and reasoning abilities. And no one doubts it’s an accurate measure of those things, which predict legal skills.”

“And that’s why top law fir- top law schools have long used that test. So how did Ketanji Brown Jackson do on the LSAT? Sorry. You’re not allowed to ask. Because asking is racism,” Carlson concluded.

It's quite evident that if Jackson had high LSAT scores that the liberal news outlets would have told us all about it. It doesn't take a political scientist to figure that out. So we can accurately assume that they weren't remarkable. In fact, according to her Wikipedia page, the summary of her Harvard accolades are as an improv comedian, and a referenced time when she headed a “protest” against a fellow student for displaying a confederate flag in his dorm window (Is publicly harrassing a student because you don't like the flag he has in his window “protesting” or bullying?):

After high school, Jackson studied government at Harvard University. She performed improv comedy and took classes in drama, and led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dorm window.

The creed of liberalism is social progress, with the goal to move onward and upward in the quest for utopia. To change the antiquated evil and replace it with universal good. This is liberalism in theory. However, liberalism in practicality is regressive by all standards. For example, as a country we made hiring people based on things like skin color and/or gender illegal decades ago. And yet somehow in 2022 we are still effectively hiring the most powerful people in the country based specifically on race and gender.

Furthermore, it should go without saying that if the establishment wanted to nominate the most qualified person predicated solely on skin color and gender (in collusion with merit) then a white man would probably end up being the choice. But, let's be honest, the entire reason the Biden administration promised to nominate a black woman was because liberals don't want a white man nominated. So, if a white man were to be selected, he would definitely have to be homosexual or Jewish (or his primary identity would have to be something other than white man; e.g., Pete Buttigieg). And even if that were to happen, it would still likely be considered racist and sexist (or whatever the current phase is).

Then again, it's common knowledge that liberals are the real white supremacists. So, maybe in 30 years they will inconspicuously nominate a black woman trapped in a racist white man's body to replace Jackson, and bring things full circle.

Don't Make The Black Kid Angry

Just another day in America, where a black kid gets angry and chases down a white kid in front of hundreds of people and sucker punches him from behind while he is running a race.

It's totally normal. It's one of the strengths of diversity. In fact, no charges were filed or anything because that might have even made things worse. So the white kid just accepted his dose of strength like a true American does.

I can hear the Karen's and Fellow Whites from miles away yelling: "You're only posting this because you're a racist! You wouldn't say anything if the races were reversed and the white kid had chased down the black kid and sucker punched him from behind."

I'm can't remember the last time a white kid chased down a black kid while he was running a race and sucker punched him from behind in front of hundreds of people, then just casually walked away like nothing happened. But, the Karen's and Fellow Whites wouldn't have to worry about me getting upset about it, because it would be international news. There would probably even be riots and looting peaceful protesting if the white kid didn't get some serious prison time for committing such an obvious racism.

Diversity is such a great strength for white countries that you just have to overlook random acts of violence at track meets. If your child gets attacked for making a black kid angry, they should just realize they were in the wrong and the entire family publicly apologize to the attacker and things will eventually blow over.

Just imagine how boring America would be without the joys of diversity. That white kid will be able to tell his grandchildren about the time he was running a race at a high school track meet and was chased down from behind and sucker punched because he was white winning the race. 

And think about all of those parents in the stands. It would have just been another boring track meet filled with gossip if not for diversity. White people are so boring!

That black kid will be treated like a hero in his school. And deservedly so. He single-handedly made track meets interesting again. The stands will be full every time he competes.

Diversity is our strength!