An interesting idea from Jordan Peterson.

I follow both Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson.

I remember a cringeworthy debate between the two, who did not agree, in which Sam Harris sort of hogged the whole interview bashing his head against Peterson's idea of 'Truth'. I think it was Sam Harris's worst interview. It blocked out any other ideas more interesting/different from his own.

So I found this snippet from a Dave Rubin interview with Jordan Peterson, in which he is allowed to say what he was not allowed to say by Sam Harris in HIS interview with Jordan Peterson.

I found it most interesting - worth archiving here!

Google gaff - re-blog

Google employee writes memo exposing company’s feminist/leftist agenda, Women at Google stay home for “feelings hurt”

AUGUST 9, 2017 / WOMENAGAINSTFEMINISMUK

The Google Revolutionary Brigade has fired an employee (James Damore) who had the balls temerity to pen a 10-page memorandum suggesting that Google’s diversity policies were based on political correctness, bad science (feminism here) and worse political bias (feminism and socialism again).  The ten-page memorandum written by Damore— trigger warning — acknowledged the general differences between men and women.

He basically said that men and women are biologically different. Google’s staff is made by great part of women doing high paid office jobs. Feminists don’t complain about it and about being underrepresented in work fields like mining, garbage collection or sewer work where men are still the work power.

That’s the “feminist equality”: The bad stuff for them, the good stuff for us.

The Left doesn’t like the memo, so they’re openly lying about the content. Read the whole thing yourself rather than buying those lies. Although the memo is being maligned in the leftist media as “anti-woman,” that’s a deliberate distortion of the letter’s contents. Damore was simply addressing the social science that shows men and women, generally speaking, have different strengths and weaknesses. The former employee was trying to address the wrongheaded diversity policies at Google, explaining that some of the discrepancies in male-to-female ratios within the company were unlikely due to discrimination, but, instead, from nature.

The memo essentially made three contentions: first, that Google had a Leftist bias which prevented them from hearing other viewpoints; second, that part of the discrepancy in employment between men and women at Google could be attributable to group differences between men and women; and third, that Google could try to make employment easier for women in general through a series of non-illegal means.

Here are a few of the things Damore DID NOT say.

1. Women Are Biologically Unfit For Tech. CNN actually ran a segment today claiming that this was Damore’s suggestion. That’s patently false. In fact, Damore openly says the opposite. The media seem completely unable to comprehend the difference between the statement “women on average are different from men” and “this particular woman is different from this particular man.” That’s because they are stupid, on average. But here’s Damore, explicitly stating that women are not unqualified as individuals:

I’m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.

He reiterates that point later in the memo:

I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).

2. Diversity Is Bad. Damore opens the memo by stating, “I value diversity and inclusion.” Actually, Damore offers an entire section of his memo devoted to “non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap.” He suggests that Google “make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration,” “allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive,” “make tech and leadership less stressful,” and “allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work,” as well as changing stereotypical biases about male performance. Damore states that he believes that “arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women” would be foolish, but if there is a goal of helping the company succeed, such measures could be worthwhile.

3. Sexism Doesn’t Exist. The memo author explicitly dismisses this notion as well. Damore writes that he is “not denying that sexism exists.” He adds:

I hope it’s clear that I’m not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn’t try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology.

4. The Memo Promotes Violence! This is the most extreme claim being made by Leftists about the memo. It’s a lie. In fact, one of the rationales behind the memo was to prevent the PC-led violence that has infected college campuses:

This same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness, which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn’t harbored the violent leftist protests that we’re seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silent, psychologically unsafe environment.

What has happened since? James Damore has been fired (Google’s Censorship???) and has got a job elsewhere.

Here is the crazy thing…

Some “upset” women in the echoing halls of Google decided to stay home from work after their feelings were hurt by the ten-page memorandum.

NPR reported that former Google employee Kelly Ellis said “some women who still work at the company stayed home on Monday because the memo made them ‘uncomfortable going back to work.'”

James Damore, who penned the politically incorrect memo, was canned by the corporation intolerant of viewpoint diversity on Monday for allegedly “perpetuating gender stereotypes.”

Ironically, the women too “upset” to go into work over a science and evidence-backed note are indeed playing into the worst gender stereotypes of all — the overly-emotional and irrational woman — and inadvertently proving what they are so fiercely attempting to deny: men and women are different.

People, feminists can’t be empowered, and simultaneously be a perpetual victim.

Uh, this kind of proves the memo’s point, no?

Caudrilla anti-fracking protests ongoing

You probably do not know because it is blanked by Mainstream Media in the UK,

But the protests against fracking in Lancashire are on-going.

On-going.

Every day.

Every single day!

These people must be tough. And dedicated. But the WINTER is coming.

This is the situation at the moment - interview on The Richie Allen Show. And more videos  you will not see on MSM for my archive on the situation now - July/August 2017, below.

Questioning History with Graham Hancock

I'm archiving this excellent interview with Graham Hancock here.

As he points out, he is not a scientist, nor an archologist, nor a geologist. He's a writer.

I've read his books. But as my eyes become more and more a bother to me, I like to listen to him instead!

The problem of using Robots is not the Robots - it's the purpose they are put to

I am intrigued with Robots. Some of them could be heck-of-a-cute.

Some of them are already scary.

What is a drone, if not a killing robot?

We have the robots - new ones almost daily, cute, scary, efficient, personable, useful, helpful - life saving even. Loveable!

But we want them to have their own intelligence. And that's another thing! Whose morals will we program them with? 

And will they change how WE behave? Well -yes - they already do.

The planes used as weapons in the 9/11 attack

I was trying to find out more about the actual weapons used in 9/11.

Do we know how many passengers were on each plane? Well, yes. I was unaware of how many people must have been killed in the planes when they crashed. It seems 232 passengers and crew? died. All the planes were really empty on those flights.It could have been far, far worse. I wonder if all the passengers were eventually identified?

This article is worth archiving here on my alien planet blog

The planes of 9/11

Flying weapons.

• 1 Comment

• By Eric Benson 
• Published Aug 27, 2011

P4: The Fleet

---

American Airlines Flight 11 was a Boeing 767-200ER built in 1987. The “ER” stands for “extended range”; the plane could fly from New York to Beijing nonstop.

United Flight 175 was also a Boeing 767-200ER, built four years earlier, in 1983. The 767 had debuted the year before.

American Airlines Flight 77 was a Boeing 757-200 built in 1991, four feet shorter and four feet slimmer than the 767-200ER.

United Airlines Flight 93 was also a 757-200, built in 1996. The model was discontinued in 2005.
Illustrations by Martin Ansin

The first of the four planes [P4] to depart was American ­Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767-200ER. It was 159 feet and two inches long, with a sixteen-foot-six-inch-wide body that allowed for two aisles. The plane made daily flights between Boston and Los Angeles, and when it took off at 7:59 a.m. on the morning of the eleventh, it carried only 81 passengers in its 158 seats. Forty-seven minutes later, it crashed into the North Tower at 440 mph, carrying 9,717 gallons of jet fuel, 14,000 gallons under capacity.


United Flight 175, also a Boeing 767-200ER, was the second. Like American Airlines 11, it was scheduled to fly between ­Logan and LAX. When United 175 took off at 8:14 a.m., it was even lighter than the American flight: Only 56 out of 168 seats were occupied. When it crashed into the South Tower at 9:03 a.m., traveling 540 mph, it had 9,118 gallons of fuel in its tanks.


American Airlines Flight 77 was the third plane to take off that day, a Boeing 757-200. AA77 left Washington, D.C., at 8:20 a.m. bound for Los Angeles. It was two-thirds empty, with 58 passengers in its 176 seats, and its tanks were 4,000 gallons under its 11,500-gallon capacity. It crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m., ­flying 530 mph.


The fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, was also a 757-200. It was delayed for 42 minutes past its ­scheduled 8 a.m. departure from Newark bound for San Francisco. When it finally took off, it carried only 37 ­passengers—its capacity was 182—and it was loaded with a little over 7,000 gallons of fuel. It crashed at 560 mph into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:03 a.m.


The two models—the 767 and the 757—were introduced within a year of one another in the early eighties, when Boeing was fighting lackluster sales, dwindling cash reserves, and a surging European rival, Airbus. The company marketed the planes to airlines as cost-savers, emphasizing their fuel efficiency and their modified cockpits, which allowed two pilots to do the work of three. Crews testing both aircraft gave them high marks for precise handling.

9/11 Conspiracy is still with us

My first impulse when I watched the Twin Towers fall, was that something was amiss. Contrived. Alien. Evil. A False Flag to use conspracy terms.

For me this was confirmed by strange occurences such as seeing Building 7 implode on the BBC news before it happened.

There are a lot of unanswered questions for me. I am a conspiracy theory follower.

Here is a four hour plus original movie on YouTube - THE NEW PEARL HARBOUR

So I'm archiving these for future reference - I think they might be muddled so I give myself permission to ALTER THIS POST at a later date when I've unmuddled myself. I like these short section videos from the full length movie. But they are not in sequence.