proving a negative point...

That is not what she said so I guess the same negative is yet proven again. And “gauging growth” was not the point, so maybe even a third proof of the same negative?

I believe it was me and that it was related to COVID-19.

I can think of many negatives that can easily be proven e.g. “There are no square-circles”.

If you want to prove that no unicorns exist within certain portion of spacetime, you have to observe every part of that spacetime. If it’s impractical to observe it in its entirety, you can at least observe a portion of it and generalize from that. Ultimately, you will either observe unicorns or you won’t. The same applies to conspiracies (whether they are related to COVID-19 or US presidential election.)

I am not sure who came up with the idea that “You can’t prove a negative” but it’s sure as hell a convenient way to place the burden of proof on everyone other than yourself.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

Whoever makes a claim carries the burden of proof regardless of positive or negative content in the claim.

If you’re going to adopt a position, you better have a rationale backing it up. Otherwise, you have to refrain from adopting a position.

If you’re going to say “There is a conspiracy!”, you better be able to prove it. But also, if you’re going to say “There is no conspiracy!”, you also better be able to prove that. Otherwise, you have to take a neutral stance and say “I don’t know, let’s see”.

(Basically, I agree with what phyllo and obsrvr524 said.)

And I forgot to mention, concerning breaking federal and constitutional law –

That alone invalidates most of the contested ballots. They are prima facie fraudulent in ALL States.

And again, the constitution is toilet paper, like I said before.

Life has changed massively since 1776!!

The constitution doesn’t even allow for amendments (we just made that shit up). Even our amendments are toilet paper (not all of them)

Negatives can easily be proven: god exists and god is good. Every being in existence is having their consent violated except god. That’s not a good god. That’s the most maniacly evil being possible. If god is defined as good, and every being is having their consent violated (the only definition of bad) and god could have made it differently, and god is defined as good, then we can easily prove god doesn’t exist.

It’s not very complicated.

It might be mere toilet paper to you, but to the armed forces of your nation, it is the Law. If you don’t believe that~~~

You’re insane. Now you’re trying to pull the “unpatriotic armed forces” card on me…

The preamble has “provide for the common defense” written Right there!!! I wouldn’t change the preamble.

Just like there might be two good sentences in the Bible - there is good stuff in the constitution, but!!! It’s basically toilet paper for our modern era.

You keep avoiding my argument about how to get all Supreme Court justices hung by the letter of the law of the actual constitution!!!

You know why? Because you know it’s a fact and you’re full of shit.

Like they say it’s way to start far afield. The thing is maybe even more multiferious than that. To start with something which may raise eyebrows, it is probable that fraud is committed left and right in ant general election to a degree.

I have sewn one, almost unpreceptible in the Gore vs Bush election.

The thing is, all administrations of short duration , max
8 years, whereas there are big time bosses out there with interminable claims to power.

To these presidents are held accountable.There may be some kind of super play here, and they can play this for a few more months. By that time things will calm. up, and even some kind of power- trade- detente can be established.

The negation is only appearent on the only public understanding of it, so that is why the cintuniuum must keep rolling along.

There is far more to this than meets the eye, and we are simply not prevy to this.

…how I deal with an outed misogynist, that only knows how to operate through the blinkered eyes and mind of misogyny.

It works for me, so not at my detriment… only a fickwitz would expect it to be counter-so, and I certainly don’t operate from a place of appealing from my ex-ILP authority but from appealing from my own authority. How very misogynistically-minded indeed.

I’m not sure why my statement needed an interpretation? an interpretation which seems like pure projection.

The exchange that I had mentioned that observation in and which my statement was taken from, never got to progress beyond the initial stage of the inquiry, due to a preempting that something may reoccur that had happened in previous exchanges, on the matter of clarity of definitions.

Do you think PK got his answer?

Hmm… bizarre.

I am not a misogynist. I am not a closeted misogynist. At least not for at least the past year anyways.

Maybe you’re a misogynist or closeted one anyways. I moved past that.

I actually changed my language in the past year to call it “mutual subtle rape”.

Believe it or not, I actually have lots of women who really enjoy my company, very good acquaintances, if not friends yet… no, not friends yet, close though.

Women friends are probably 2 if I’m really honest. That’s not unusual for a man to only have that many female friends. (Counting family and people I used to date is cheating)

You’re pissing at windmills about me. I’m sure you’ll continue to do it.

Shit I said in my last 12 years, fucking insane… but then again, nobody taught me about relative aversion signaling with sex dimorphism. To this day, besides me you’ll not find that all explained in one book or paper. Learning new things for the entire species is confusing and extremely difficult on the spirit… you flail everywhere and make a shit ton of mistakes along the way.

He still is one… with me, but when will he cease to be.

Putting forth the same old garbage from years ago,
in terms of evidence of my profundity… because that’s all he’s got,
because he can’t irk me with his (non)-profundity… because that’s all he’s got.

Will he return for closure/to resolve his query posed…? nobody knows.

Lol

I do love making myself laugh so and saying clever things, both at the same time.

Dab Nabbit! Alright Mag…

I know life, mind and psychology well enough to know that you’re a closeted misogynist … I brought that out in you, it triggers you. At this point, I have no tools for you.

It’s an extremely uncontroversial thing to say that because of relative aversion to approach in a sex dimorphism species, that when men and women have sex, they are ‘subtle raping’ each other. About a year ago I just thought it was men raping women. I didn’t even call it subtle rape back then, and I gave the female no agency back then.

I’m not kidding you mag… I think you have latent misogyny in you. Your vitriol towards me is not rational. Believe it or not, I’m a nice person who says lots of intense shit. I say it because it’s true. It was intense to me when I figured it out, and it flipped my mind … everyone’s mind flips when they move through this world and think “what the fuck?!” When they don’t have words. I worked hard for my words.

Peter is still lost, he has trouble with VERY BASIC concepts of the zero sum nature of reality… it’s too much for him to bear. He doesn’t respond to a zero sum reality with integrity; psychologically he is greed and not need; which is why he’s drawn to trump so fiercely …

Ultimately, I think you and Peter have enough life experience to know this is true.

How does this refer to proving a negative point? The human species has never had consensual sex.

m love me a little subtle raping

Subtle rape is not the biggest problem here. It’s the negative zero sum nature of our reality that’s the biggest problem here.

There are categories. Subtle rape is all human sex.

Ok, quite a problem!

But when you have a world of 2 winners and billions of losers… that’s some serious shit phon!

Everyone likes to think themselves the conqueror…

In a reality like this:

When you win, you lose; and when you lose, you really lose!

I’m trying to raise this species up one person at a time.

I’ve lived in my current apartment for 2 years now…

4 nice and pretty (and cool) women have already overtly offered to want to have sex with me in a half block radius…

I refuse it because I see the long game.

You folks don’t see the long game.

lol

Nope!

Because Someone has amused me so, I will let up on the haranguing,
…but that is all I will let up on.

You two have sex on the brain, I have the cosmos on the brain. Like, the foreverness of the rest of all our existences.

Zero sum realities cause infinite hell for everyone trapped in them. That’s why the project of a new reality is taking place right now.

For that, you need focus and credibility.

I have focus and credibility… I earned both, the hard way.

You two: have neither. That’s why you’re not in the cumulative creator roles right now.

The cosmos is much vaster than you and phon comprehend, and neither of you are stepping up to the plate.

you don’t know anything about what I comprehend