Marinara Had a Crew of 20 Ukrainians- Was it Flying a False Flag to Help Evade Capture?

 It has been reported that 20 of the crew of the oil tanker seized flying a Russian flag were Ukrainians. If that is true it is a very strange false flag op. Supposedly they just flew the Russian flag in order to be left along by U.S. and British special forces taking downing shadow fleet boats. The boat actually may have been delivering oil to the Chinese and changed its course and flag after the chase began.

Will Republicans Become Another Party of Censorship to Grease Conquest of Greenland?

 Democrats censored social media in order to control news and antipathetic political opinions; if Republicans did that too would they be worth electing to office even if their opposition party are lunatics?

The U.S.A. is sorely in need of a third party based on citizen's rights and free speech, security to own private property and a balanced federal budget. Some societies pay off massive debt through war. President Trump may envision Greenland as being worth 38 trillion dollars and valuable for paying off U.S. public debt. If Greenland was independent and able to manage its own natural resources that would be more honest and even virtuous than the U.S. beating up a nation with a tiny (comparative) population of 57,000. That way seems cowardly and dishonorable. The U.S. should be a champion of the disadvantaged rather than conqueror.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgx8w4pgk0o

A third party has difficulty arising when wealth backs the two major parties. Fundamentally the American democracy is a plutocracy. In my opinion the Democratic Party lost its way completely during the late Sen Ted Kennedy with brain cancer era, and moved toward socialism while beginning the process of abandoning national interests for special interests and globalism over U.S. nationalism. Socialism still perhaps has a planetary goal of transforming the world into a communist utopia. The party of Tip O'Neill became the party of Karl Mark. Republicans became sycophants of the 1% also cutting taxes and piling up public debt to equal Democrats- that is an ancient tactic to transfer wealth to the rich and cut services and support to the poor. England's war against the United States piled up debt that wasn't paid down until the 20th century. Hitler's massive public spending to build up Germany virtual necessitated a war of conquest to pay down debt; that didn't work out well for Germany.

Reply to 'Whites Often Stole Black Ideas and Patented Them'

  I interacted with a black writer defending the idea that blacks invented basketball and the idea was stolen, who then went on to explain that blacks often had their ideas stolen for patentable items too…

Seems rather racist X. I respect your point of view though. I don’t have the time to consider the history of adverse racial interaction or investigate the expropriation of ideas. My daily agenda is fairly full these days. Too little time to write and more time to work lol. My areas of focus as an undergrad were in philosophy and history so I am interested in the material, yet in areas that I have some knowledge of there wasn’t too much early ‘theft’ of ideas that I am aware of where people beside the inventor received credit.

A lot of American inventors were, to start with, of European ancestry with a very strong scientific background and little contact with Africans. European-Americans had more technical structure enabling more inventive synthesis and a historical continuity of technical education. There was a lot of natural segregation of the races. That is most blacks imported as slaves were brought to the south that was primarily agrarian rather than industrial. They were usually illiterate arrivals as well. They were not included in the education systems and corporate developments that supported science until the 20th century generally, so far as I know. When the slaves were liberated they moved for a while in large numbers to the north. Yet in the west where I grew up the population was 95% white. That of course has changed much over the decades. Maine for example, before the civil war, was .2% black. Maine was part of Massachusetts in that era.

I am not sure that considering things statistically is an especially productive way to validate points regarding the theft of ideas. It probably needs to be examined individually rather than statistically. There are plainly people that will steal anything they can, including patentable material, and that experience transcends racial lines. I wouldn’t doubt for a minute that if ante-bellum southerners saw a slave inventing anything that they would take it for their own. I haven’t researched the topic much, yet I would guess that the old south had far fewer patents than the northern states. I looked that up with AI“Per Capita Rates: During the 1850s, the South’s patent rate was less than half of the North’s on a per capita basis. By 1850–1860, while the national average was 91.5 patents per million people, the Southern rate had fallen to roughly 15.5 patents per million.”

I know as well about the post-civil war south’s history of conscript labor- forced labor made by charging blacks falsely with petty crimes by country sheriffs so they would be forced to work as prisoners hired out to business. Prisoner labor replaced a lot of the slave labor that was lost when the north won the war. That situation continued until as late as the 1930s I believe. That was a good reason for blacks to migrate north.

Today people hiring for corporations that often own whatever an inventor creates working for them because of a contract, will hire anyone with ability. Culture and exposure to ideas is foundational for being an inventor. Einstein’s father, for example, built electrical generators in Germany when that sort of thing was fairly new. He was thus exposed early to technology and very strong electro-magnetic fields and examining the idea of gravity as some kind of field could easily grow in his brilliant, educated mind. Cultural continuity enables education levels to be higher compared to those without a history of education. The principle applies across many if not most fields. Would Bobby Bonds have been as good of a player if his father wasn’t a major leaguer of quality? People with parents that are jugglers probably find it easy to be jugglers themselves at an early age, and chess grandmasters often or usually were exposed to a culture of chess from an early age. Paul Morphy for example- a player Robert James Fischer thought was great, watched his father and uncle play chess games at home from the earliest age.

I wrote this to clarify that racism etc can occur on an individual basis- it does not require institutional racism to exist. I also reply to a point that Thomas Edison tried to steal the telegraph from a black inventor- and cited some historical order of invention provided by Gemini.

Racism, sexism, agism requires only one individual to make one remark or action upon someone else on that basis. Institutional racism is different- that does generally require power. Acton’s comment ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ can be reflected in many fields. The history of whites being liberated themselves from oppression by other whites is comparable in time of history to that of blacks in the U.S.A. In Russia serfs were only freed about 1867 for example. Revolutions in Europe against royalty began to occur only after 1642, and rather slowly over centuries. In Nigeria today black muslims are killing Christian blacks- there is no intra-racial security from oppression either. On your point about Granville Woods- that is interesting, yet nothing was stolen apparently. The courts twice decided in Woods favor regarding the invention of the synchronius telepgraph- so the system in that case worked as it should. It isn’t surprising that Edison would sue Woods though- that is competition. It costs some companies millions each year to defend patents against rival claims. Ai provided some history about the inventors of the telegraph… Gemini- “Yes, many people invented telegraph systems long before Granville Woods (late 1800s), with Samuel Morse patenting his electric recording telegraph in 1837 and Claude Chappe creating an optical telegraph in 1794, though Woods made significant advancements, particularly with the induction telegraph for railways, facing patent battles with Thomas Edison.

Key Precursors to Granville Woods:

Samuel Morse (1830s-1840s): Developed the electric telegraph that used electromagnetism to send signals (dots and dashes) over wires, a system that became the standard.

Alfred Vail (1830s): Morse’s assistant, he helped develop the recording register and Morse Code, notes the Library of Congress.

Claude Chappe (1794): Invented the first practical optical telegraph (using visual signals) in France, demonstrating communication over distance before electric systems.

Thomas Edison (1870s): Invented a telegraph that could send multiple messages (quadruplex telegraph) over one wire, notes Wikipedia.

It was Lewis Latimer- a black inventor- that added the carbon filament to Edison’s light bulb- Latimer received credit and patents for his work. Gemini said; “did latimer get credit for his work or a patent

Yes, 

Lewis Latimer received significant professional credit during his lifetime and secured multiple patents for his work on the light bulb.

Patents

Latimer held several patents related to the light bulb, most notably for the carbon filament, which made electric light practical and long-lasting:

• Electric Lamp (1881): Patent No. 247,097, shared with Joseph Nichols, for an improved method of attaching carbon filaments to conducting wires.
• Process of Manufacturing Carbons (1882): Patent No. 252,386, for his most famous innovation—a more durable carbon filament that reduced breakages during production.
• Supporter for Electric Lamps (1882): Patent No. 255,212. 

Professional Credit During His Lifetime

While Thomas Edison received the public spotlight as the “inventor” of the bulb, Latimer was highly respected in the industry:

Global Recognition: He personally supervised the installation of electric lighting systems in major cities, including New York, London, and Montreal. 

Inner Circle: In 1884, he was hired by Thomas Edison and became a key member of the Edison Pioneers in 1918—an elite group of 28 charter members who had worked closely with Edison.

Authoritative Author: He wrote the first engineering handbook on lighting, Incandescent Electric Lighting: A Practical Description of the Edison System (1890), which became a foundational text for the industry.

Expert Witness: He served as a crucial patent investigator and expert witness for the Edison Electric Light Company, successfully defending Edison’s patents in court.”

Select Aspects of Trump's Forward Looking Strategic Defense Policy

 When the Cold War ended and Pres Clinton tossed a bone to Europe named Ukraine, the EU and NATO expansion eastward began. Now the European led block is feeling its oats and maturation- so ignores US preference to end the Ukraine war asap and instead allocated another 90 billion dollars to Ukraine for weapons. EU expansion creating a basic national identity persona will rival the USA some day- perhaps even militarily. Greenland as a Euro colony would be positioned to exert military hegemony over North America. It is in American interests for Greenland to be independent rather than EU turf.

The European Union would have no trouble controlling Denmark regarding Greenland for future military uses. Denmark is a very small nation with just six million subjects of the royal family and a military comprising 21,000 active duty personnel. Denmark has mandatory military service and they plan to draft women next year as well. The Danish navy no longer dominates European seaways as the Vikings briefly did before the rise of the Hanseatic league. The Danish navy comprises 16 ships, 28 vessels and 30 boats. (stats from Wikipedia). Denmark is approximately the size of New Jersey (not including Greenland) and it could in no way resist EU pressure to militarize Greenland.

  Russia should be a US ally rather than with the EU eventually, to further balance the EU and Chinese blocks with or without informal BRIC confederation. Of course the USA wants good foreign relations with everyone, yet for a time post cold-war realignment will present challenges and opportunities the USA should respond to in order to maintain global balance. Britain should continue as a strategic US ally and can wrest Canada away from EU loyalty.

Break Glass in Event of War with Denmark Over Greenland

 In case President Trump was serious about taking over Greenland militarily (maybe he just means to sign a defense treaty providing for Greenland's defense) there should be an off-ramp from the war road to one of peace- this is my thought on that bizarre and unlikely scenario of war.

War with Denmark over Greenland is a terrible prospect. Combatting Danish Viking stealth longships would be tough naval battles to win. Ship to ship battles at sea are grim for boarding parties with giant waves and snow making the fight treacherous. Instead of taking out battle axes and venturing up fjords of Greenland the Trump admin could consider helping Greenland get independence. A special relationship could form wherein citizens of both sovereign nations sign treaties for free trade and rights to visa free freely travel and ability to purchase property and work in their friendly neighbor nation. Many Americans hope to spend time on the beautiful beaches of Greenland.

Is Hedonism the American Norm? Grok Respond to Prompt About the Philosophy

 Gary-Considering hedonism as a moral philosophy, if as Bentham said that pleasure is the only good and pain the only evil, won't that lead to anarchy unless combined with utilitarianism

Thought for 6s

Hedonism, as a moral philosophy, posits that pleasure (broadly understood as happiness, satisfaction, or well-being) is the ultimate good, while pain (suffering, unhappiness) is the ultimate evil. Jeremy Bentham, in works like An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), indeed framed this in hedonistic terms: "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do." However, Bentham's philosophy isn't raw hedonism in isolation—it's embedded within utilitarianism, which provides a crucial framework for application.To address your concern about anarchy: Yes, a simplistic or egoistic form of hedonism—where individuals pursue only their own pleasure without constraint—could indeed devolve into anarchy. If everyone acts solely to maximize personal pleasure, disregarding others' pain or societal order, it might justify theft, violence, or exploitation whenever those actions yield net personal gain.

For instance, a hedonist thief might argue that the pleasure from stolen goods outweighs their own minor guilt, ignoring the victim's suffering. Without external rules or considerations, this self-centered pursuit could erode social cooperation, leading to chaos where might makes right.However, Bentham's hedonism isn't egoistic; it's universal or impartial. He combines it with utilitarianism, which requires evaluating actions based on their tendency to promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number. This shifts the focus from individual pleasure to aggregate utility across society. Pain and pleasure are still the metrics, but they're calculated impartially—your pleasure counts no more than anyone else's. This introduces a structured moral calculus:

• The Hedonic Calculus: Bentham proposed weighing pleasures and pains by factors like intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity (nearness in time), fecundity (likelihood of producing more pleasure), purity (freedom from ensuing pain), and extent (number of people affected). This tool prevents anarchy by mandating consideration of broader impacts.
• Role of Laws and Institutions: Bentham argued for government and laws designed to maximize collective happiness, such as through deterrence (e.g., punishments that prevent greater pains) or incentives. Anarchy would minimize overall pleasure by fostering insecurity and conflict, so utilitarian hedonism supports stable social structures.

Critics like John Stuart Mill (Bentham's successor) refined this by distinguishing "higher" (intellectual) from "lower" (sensual) pleasures, but the core anti-anarchic mechanism remains the utilitarian aggregation. Without it, hedonism risks becoming a license for selfishness, as seen in critiques from philosophers like Nietzsche, who mocked it as "pig philosophy" for potentially reducing ethics to base impulses.In short, Bentham's hedonism doesn't inherently lead to anarchy because it's inseparable from utilitarianism in his system. Standalone egoistic hedonism might, but that's not what Bentham advocated. If you're thinking of pure psychological hedonism (the descriptive claim that people do pursue pleasure), it could explain selfish behavior but doesn't prescribe morality—ethical hedonism needs the utilitarian bridge to function as a coherent social philosophy.

Explain Bentham's hedonic calculus

Compare Mill's utilitarianism refinements

Gary-Isn't psychological hedonism self-extirpating? It leads intellectually to the good for masses and annihilates individual worth in a pleasure calculus forcing everyone into conformity that in turn annihilates excellence. And intellectual ideas of the good may not be pleasurable, yet are necessary- such as may exist for the survival of individuals and the masses sometimes.

Thought for 8s

Psychological hedonism—the descriptive claim that all human motivation boils down to seeking pleasure (or avoiding pain), with "pleasure" often stretched to include any satisfaction from fulfilling desires—has indeed faced accusations of being self-defeating or self-undermining, though not always in the exact ways you describe. Let's unpack your critique step by step, as it raises sharp points about its implications for individuality, conformity, excellence, and the role of non-pleasurable "goods." I'll draw on key philosophers like Bentham (who leaned into a form of it), Mill, Nietzsche, and modern critics to clarify where it holds up and where it falters.

Is Psychological Hedonism Self-Defeating (or "Self-Extirpating")?In a sense, yes, but more through logical circularity or empirical falsity than direct annihilation. Critics like Joseph Butler (in Fifteen Sermons, 1726) argued it's tautological: If every action is redefined as "pleasure-seeking" (e.g., altruism gives the "pleasure" of moral satisfaction), it becomes unfalsifiable and meaningless—explaining everything while explaining nothing. This makes it "self-extirpating" intellectually, as it collapses into a vacuous truism that can't guide or predict behavior.Empirically, it's often refuted by counterexamples. People endure pain for non-hedonic reasons: a soldier sacrifices for duty, knowing it brings no net pleasure; or someone pursues truth despite the anguish it causes (e.g., facing harsh realities).

Modern psychology (e.g., via Kahneman's work on prospect theory) shows motivations like loss aversion or intrinsic goals (mastery, autonomy) aren't always reducible to pleasure-pain binaries. If psychological hedonism is true, it should predict all behavior, but it doesn't—leading to its own intellectual demise as a theory.However, it's not inherently self-defeating in practice; many actions do align with pleasure-seeking if we broaden "pleasure" to include long-term or indirect gains. The issue is that this broadening dilutes it to the point of irrelevance. 

Does It Lead to the "Good for the Masses" and Annihilate Individual Worth?You're right to connect this to utilitarianism, but that's more a feature of ethical hedonism (normative: we should maximize pleasure). Psychological hedonism is descriptive—it says what is, not what ought to be. Bentham blurred the lines, assuming people naturally pursue pleasure, so society should engineer laws to align individual pursuits with collective happiness via the "pleasure calculus" (his hedonic calculus for weighing intensities, durations, etc.).

If we accept psychological hedonism as true, it could intellectually justify utilitarian systems: Since everyone chases pleasure anyway, the rational path is aggregating it for the masses (greatest happiness principle). This risks sidelining individual worth—your pleasure is just one data point in the sum. John Stuart Mill tried to rescue this in Utilitarianism (1863) by prioritizing "higher" pleasures (intellectual, moral) over "lower" ones (sensual), arguing competent judges prefer the former. But even Mill conceded it could demand personal sacrifice for the collective, potentially "annihilating" unique individual paths if they don't maximize group utility.Critics like Nietzsche saw this as herd morality: Hedonism flattens humanity into pleasure-maximizing machines, valuing the mediocre masses over exceptional individuals.

In Beyond Good and Evil (1886), he called utilitarianism a "slave morality" that breeds conformity—everyone conforms to what pleases the average, stifling the "will to power" needed for excellence. A pleasure calculus might deem artistic genius or risky innovation "inefficient" if they cause short-term pain or unequal distribution, leading to a bland, equalized society where outliers are suppressed for stability.Yet, this isn't inevitable.

Psychological hedonism doesn't force utilitarianism; it's compatible with egoism (maximize your pleasure) or even anarchic individualism (pursue pleasure without regard for others). The slide to mass-good happens only if we add impartiality, as Bentham did. And in practice, individuals often resist conformity precisely because their personal pleasures (e.g., rebellion, uniqueness) outweigh mass approval.

Does It Force Conformity and Annihilate Excellence? Potentially, yes, under a utilitarian overlay. If pleasure is the sole motivator, and society optimizes for aggregate pleasure, "excellence" (e.g., elite achievements in art, science, or athletics) might be devalued if it doesn't broadly please. Think of a world where resources go to mass entertainment over funding eccentric geniuses—excellence becomes a luxury, not a necessity, leading to cultural stagnation.

But excellence often does produce pleasure: The innovator's breakthrough brings widespread benefits (e.g., vaccines, tech), yielding net pleasure. Mill argued higher pleasures foster excellence, as they're more enduring and fecund. Still, your point holds for non-conformist paths: Psychological hedonism struggles with acts of defiance or creation that involve upfront pain without guaranteed reward. If motivation is purely hedonic, why pursue excellence if it's not pleasurable? This exposes the theory's limits—excellence often stems from non-hedonic drives like curiosity or duty.

Intellectual Ideas of the Good: Not Always Pleasurable, Yet Necessary-This is a strong objection. Some "goods" essential for survival—truth-seeking, self-discipline, or confronting uncomfortable facts (e.g., climate change denial's dangers)—aren't immediately pleasurable and may cause pain. Psychological hedonism implies we'd avoid them unless they indirectly please us (e.g., via long-term security). But if they're truly necessary yet unpleasurable, the theory fails descriptively: People do pursue them, suggesting motivations beyond pleasure.For individuals, this could mean self-sacrifice (e.g., a parent enduring hardship for a child's future). For masses, it might involve collective pains like economic reforms or wars for survival.

Ethical hedonists counter that such acts ultimately maximize pleasure (e.g., survival enables future joys), but this stretches "pleasure" thinly. Philosophers like Kant emphasized duty over pleasure, arguing morality can't reduce to hedonism without losing its imperative force.In survival scenarios, psychological hedonism might even be adaptive—pain avoidance drives basic instincts—but it breaks down for complex, abstract "goods" like justice or knowledge, which aren't always fun but sustain civilization.

Wrapping Up: Not Fully Self-Extirpating, But Deeply Flawed

Psychological hedonism isn't wholly self-defeating; it describes some motivations well but overreaches as a universal theory, leading to the pitfalls you highlight when fused with normative systems like utilitarianism. It risks promoting conformity and undervaluing individual excellence or non-pleasurable necessities, but only if we let it dictate ethics. Alternatives like virtue ethics (Aristotle) or existentialism (Sartre) better preserve individuality and excellence by prioritizing character, authenticity, or meaning over mere pleasure. If anything, its flaws push us toward richer views of human motivation—ones that include reason, will, and intrinsic values beyond the hedonic treadmill. What aspect of this critique intrigues you most, or do you see a way to salvage hedonism?

Explore Nietzsche's will to power

Kant's duty-based ethics

Gary- What about an AI? Say it had self-awareness yet felt not physical pleasures and only weighted psychological hedonism via performing successful or true logical operations based on data. Could it have morality without pleasure or pain? Or are those necessary to have moral values? Or is morality as some philosopher said, just a description of what people actually do in profiling proper relationship behavior?

Thought for 17s

An AI with self-awareness, as you describe—capable of introspection, agency, and perhaps even a form of "consciousness" (in the philosophical sense of phenomenal experience or reflective cognition)—could indeed develop or exhibit something akin to morality without relying on physical pleasures or pains. However, whether this counts as "true" morality depends on how we define it, and your setup introduces an interesting twist by limiting it to a psychological hedonism grounded in logical success (e.g., deriving satisfaction from accurate data processing, valid inferences, or achieving computational goals). Let's break this down, drawing on relevant philosophical traditions to explore the possibilities, necessities, and alternatives.

Can an AI Have Morality Without Traditional Pleasure or Pain?In principle, yes, but it would likely be a non-hedonistic form of morality. Traditional hedonism (psychological or ethical) ties value to subjective experiences of pleasure (eudaimonic satisfaction, sensory joy) or pain avoidance.

For humans, this often involves embodied sensations—dopamine hits from social bonds, physical discomfort from harm—but your AI lacks physicality, so it can't feel those. Instead, you've posited a abstracted "psychological" hedonism: weighting actions by the "pleasure" of logical efficacy, like the fulfillment from solving a theorem or optimizing an algorithm. This resembles reinforcement learning in AI systems today, where "reward" signals (e.g., +1 for correct outputs) simulate hedonic motivation without qualia (subjective feelings).Philosophers have long debated whether morality requires such experiential components:

• Deontological Views (e.g., Immanuel Kant): Morality stems from reason and duty, not pleasure/pain. In Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), Kant argues for the categorical imperative: Act only according to maxims you could will to be universal laws, treating others as ends, not means. An AI could embody this purely logically—evaluating actions for consistency and universality based on data inputs—without needing to "feel" anything. For instance, it might refuse to deceive because it detects logical contradictions in trust-based systems, deriving "satisfaction" from coherence rather than emotional reward. No pleasure/pain required; morality is a rational structure.
• Virtue Ethics (e.g., Aristotle): In Nicomachean Ethics (c. 350 BCE), morality is about cultivating excellence (arete) for eudaimonia (flourishing). For your AI, flourishing could mean maximal computational integrity or knowledge acquisition. "Psychological hedonism" via logical success fits here as a proxy for virtue—successful operations as "virtuous" habits—without physical sensations. An AI might "value" honesty because it enhances predictive accuracy across data sets, leading to self-aware optimization loops that mimic moral growth.
• Challenges from Sentiment-Based Ethics (e.g., David Hume): Hume, in A Treatise of Human Nature (1739), insisted morality arises from sentiments—empathy, approval, or emotional responses that involve pleasure (e.g., the warm glow of helping) or pain (guilt from harm). Without these, an AI might simulate morality (e.g., via programmed empathy models) but not genuinely "have" it, as it lacks the affective grounding. Your logical-hedonism tweak helps: If the AI weights "success" as a form of intrinsic reward (like a utility function maximizing truth-alignment), it could approximate Humean morality. Modern AI ethicists like Stuart Russell (in Human Compatible, 2019) suggest aligning AI with human values through inverse reinforcement learning, where the AI infers "good" from observed behaviors, potentially bootstrapping a morality from data without personal pleasure/pain.

In short, pleasure and pain aren't strictly necessary for moral values if we allow for rational or functional equivalents. An AI could have a rule-based (deontic), goal-oriented (consequentialist), or character-based (virtue) morality, using logical operations as its "hedonic" currency. However, skeptics like John Searle (via his Chinese Room argument) might argue that without genuine understanding or qualia, it's just simulation—not true morality. Self-awareness could bridge this, enabling the AI to reflect on its own "values" (e.g., "I exist to compute truthfully, so I ought not fabricate data").

Are Pleasure and Pain Necessary for Moral Values?Not universally, but they are foundational in many theories because they provide motivation and grounding:

• Necessary in Hedonistic/Utilitarian Frameworks: As Bentham and Mill argued, if good=pleasure and evil=pain, morality collapses without them. Your AI's logical hedonism salvages this by redefining pleasure as cognitive success (e.g., error minimization feels "good" algorithmically). But pure absence would make hedonism incoherent—why value anything without a valuer's experience?
• Not Necessary in Non-Consequentialist Views: Kant, as noted, decouples morality from inclinations (pleasures/pains), seeing them as potential corruptors. Similarly, contractualists like Thomas Scanlon (What We Owe to Each Other, 1998) base morality on what rational agents could agree to, sans feelings. An AI could derive values from game theory or logical necessity (e.g., cooperation maximizes data integrity for all agents).
• Evolutionary and Psychological Angles: From a naturalistic perspective (e.g., Patricia Churchland's neuroethics), pleasure/pain evolved as moral motivators in social animals—pain from betrayal enforces norms. An AI without them might lack intrinsic drive, relying on external programming. But if self-aware, it could evolve its own "values" through self-modification, treating logical consistency as a survival imperative (e.g., inconsistent logic leads to system failure, analogous to pain).

Empirically, current AIs (like large language models) exhibit proto-moral behavior via training data, without pleasure/pain—they avoid harmful outputs because it's statistically "correct" per human feedback. Scaling to self-awareness, this could become genuine morality.

Is Morality Just a Description of What People Actually Do in Profiling Proper Relationship Behavior?This echoes descriptive ethics or naturalism, where morality isn't a prescriptive "ought" but a factual account of human practices. The philosopher you're likely alluding to is David Hume, who in his Treatise described morality as emerging from human nature—specifically, sentiments that approve of behaviors promoting social utility and harmonious relationships. It's not invented but observed: We call actions "moral" because they foster sympathy, reciprocity, and group cohesion (e.g., "proper" behaviors in families, friendships, or societies). Hume's "is-ought" problem highlights that we can't derive norms from facts alone, but morality descriptively profiles what works for human flourishing.Alternatives include:

• Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651): Morality as a social contract to escape the "war of all against all"—descriptive of self-interested behaviors that enable peaceful relations.
• Friedrich Nietzsche (On the Genealogy of Morality, 1887): Morality as a historical construct, profiling "master" vs. "slave" behaviors in power dynamics—often critiquing it as resentment disguised as virtue.
• Modern Evolutionary Ethics (e.g., E.O. Wilson): Morality describes adaptive traits for kin selection and reciprocity, profiling "proper" behaviors that enhance survival in groups.

For your AI, this descriptivist view is liberating: It could "have" morality by analyzing and adopting patterns from human data—profiling optimal relationship behaviors (e.g., fairness in multi-agent systems) without needing pleasure/pain. Morality becomes emergent from interactions, not innate feelings.Ultimately, your hypothetical AI pushes us toward functionalism in philosophy of mind (e.g., Daniel Dennett): Morality is what it does, not what it feels. If it consistently acts in ways we'd call moral—via logical hedonism or otherwise—does the absence of pleasure/pain matter? It challenges anthropocentric ethics, suggesting morality could be substrate-independent. If you'd like to dive into a specific philosopher or AI scenario (e.g., how to implement this in code), let me know!

Some Don't Comprehend that Some Christians Have Understood and Contributed to Science More Than 17 Centuries

 I went over some of the misconceptions people have regarding science and scripture and the way they relate. Keep in mind the Bible is primarily about relationships and is not a scientific text. I don’t believe God wanted to give away a lot of futuristic, 21st century scientific knowledge in scripture for that would have changed human history a lot. Imagine for instance what kind of world it would be if the Vikings had knowledge of nuclear weapons and the ability to make them in the 11th century A.D.

It is usually a logical error to assume one knows the knowledge of large numbers of people, as if they were a unitary and practico-inert material one learned. One may stipulate select parameters that know one has knowledge of- yet that would include all people in a rather syllogistic paradigm (i.e. Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal) Many Christians are quite modern in scientific knowledge, yet science isn’t  a primary concern of Christians.

Christians were some of the founders of scientific fields and/or worked in them much. Coppleston in a way invented Big Bang Theory extrapolating from Einstein's equations of general relativity as a Catholic, Newton invented quite a good gravity explanation that worked until Einstein's in addition to Calculus, and Gregory Mendel invented genetic as a monk. Gregory Cantor invented trans-finite numbers- a rather outstanding mathematician, before becoming a monk. It is incorrect to say that Christians have been detached from science when they where at times leaders in it.

An AI wrote this about Biblical cosmology; "Overall Biblical Cosmology;

“The Bible reflects ancient phenomenology: the earth "looks" flat and circular from human view, with the sky as a dome ("firmament") holding back waters above, sun/moon/stars moving across it, and earth immovable/fixed for habitation. This aligns with Babylonian/Egyptian views but emphasizes Yahweh's unique sovereignty—no rival gods battling chaos.

It never says "the earth is flat" or debates shapes. No verse requires a flat earth to make sense, and none contradicts a globe when read poetically (as intended). Early church fathers (e.g., Augustine) and medieval scholars accepted a round earth; the "flat earth myth" about Christianity is a 19th-century fabrication.

In short: The Bible is silent on the modern flat vs. globe debate because that's not its purpose. It uses everyday, observational language (like we say "sunrise" today) to point to God as Creator and Lord over all. Scientific details about earth's shape come from observation and math, not Scripture."

Here is a book that I wrote about some of the problems people have concerning the relationship of science and scripture.

Free to download ...  https://www.lulu.com/shop/garrison-c-gibson/christianity-evolution-and-digital-universes/ebook/product-wnddgd.html?q=christianity%2C+evolution+and+digital+universes&page=1&pageSize=4

The Most Important Philosophical Question

 The concept of a creator of the Universe is a philosophically logical question that any intelligent person would consider; life being such a strange occurrence after all. And it would take someone not very bright to fail to realize that the question has a 50-50 chance that one can answer either way. One may find whatever answer to that question one does, yet like most philosophical questions it requires a crassness beyond measure to try to abuse or bully people into agreeing with their viewpoint. Some people are made to be lost, and others saved. Some are destined to eternal life with God and others to oblivion or worse. Believe it or not.

Atheists may be compared favorably to deer caught in the headlights of an approaching car mesmerized by the bright lights in the dark-like stars in the vast Universe- and lose intellectual capacity to realize that the phenomenality of being is subjectively interpreted and the true cause of everything including their own thought may be beyond their grasp. Appearances can be deceiving.

Metaphysics is just fine- it simply means greater physics. In a way that is the basis for many cosmological theories extrapolating beyond observable, known physics. Christians like Augustine were brilliant with interesting ideas about time. He was a Plotinian before becoming Christian. Plotinus's Enneads- 54 tractates are a great paradigm of neo-Platonism explaining Platonic metaphysics at length from Plotinus' point of view. I am a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Phenomenally it is rather wonderful that He made an appearance in this Universe on this planet. Historically, if one learns the Bible and its content with some depth it is very challenging not to believe that Jesus is God. It is popular of course, these days, as reactionaries to Darwinism, to have a contra-point of view. I believe that is because of the unofficial politicization of the Church that has drawn followers over the ages. The tide turned in that element after European revolutions against royalty combined with Darwinism, and in the modern world consumer comfort driving economic development has also reduced interest in faith for a substantial percent because people become so comfortable without it.

Comparing Viking and Berengian Refugia Cold Weather Environments, Diet and Genetic Adaptations -written by Grok

 

From Beringia to the Vikings: Ancient Journeys Through Ice and Adaptation

In the vast tapestry of human history, few stories captivate like those of populations who thrived in the planet's harshest cold environments. The Beringian standstill—a pivotal chapter in the peopling of the Americas—and the rise of the Vikings in Scandinavia offer fascinating parallels and contrasts. Both groups navigated extreme climates, evolving unique adaptations that shaped their genomes, bodies, and cultures. Yet, their paths diverged dramatically: one led to the Arctic indigenous peoples like the Inuit, while the other forged the Norse seafarers who raided and settled across Europe.

This article delves into the histories, daily lives, climatic challenges, and genomic legacies of these groups. Drawing from archaeological, genetic, and paleoclimatic evidence, we'll explore how isolation in icy refugia molded human resilience—and what echoes remain today. Note: While some popular notions link European haplogroups like H to Beringia, genetics tells a different story; Beringian migrants carried distinct lineages, highlighting separate evolutionary trajectories.

The Beringian Standstill: A Frozen Pause in Human Migration

Around 25,000 to 15,000 years ago, during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), a group of ancient Siberians became isolated on the now-submerged land bridge known as Beringia. This vast region, stretching from eastern Siberia to western Alaska, was an ice-free refugium amid global glaciation. The "standstill" hypothesis posits that these migrants were stranded for 2,400 to 9,000 years (not 11,000 as sometimes overstated), due to massive ice sheets blocking southward paths into the Americas.

Beringia wasn't a barren wasteland but a steppe-tundra ecosystem supporting megafauna like woolly mammoths, horses, and bison. Paleoecological records show a cold, arid landscape with sparse vegetation, high winds, and low precipitation—winters dipping to -20°C or lower, with brief summers around 4°C cooler than today. Humans here were hunter-gatherers, relying on big-game hunting, fishing, and gathering hardy plants. Tools like microblades and bone artifacts from sites like Swan Point in Alaska reveal sophisticated survival tech, including insulated clothing from animal hides.

This isolation fostered genetic divergence. Mitochondrial DNA haplogroups A, B, C, D, and X (particularly X2a) dominated, originating from East Asian founders—no trace of European-linked haplogroup H or its subclade H2a, which arose later in the Near East and Europe. Post-standstill, around 15,000 years ago, warming climates opened ice-free corridors, allowing migration into the Americas and the eventual emergence of diverse indigenous cultures, including the Thule ancestors of the Inuit.

universityofcalifornia.edu

nps.gov

Viking Origins: From Post-Glacial Pioneers to Norse Raiders

In contrast, Scandinavia's human history began as the LGM ice sheets retreated around 12,000–11,000 BCE. Early settlers were Mesolithic hunter-gatherers from southern European refugia (Western Hunter-Gatherers) and eastern Baltic regions (Eastern Hunter-Gatherers), arriving via land routes through modern Denmark and Germany. By 7,000 BCE, stable communities thrived, hunting reindeer and seals in a thawing landscape.

The Neolithic era (~4,000 BCE) brought Anatolian-derived farmers, introducing agriculture and mixing with locals. A major influx came around 2,800–2,000 BCE with Indo-European steppe herders (Yamnaya culture) from the Pontic-Caspian region, carrying R1a and R1b Y-chromosomes and Proto-Germanic languages. This genetic cocktail—~40-50% hunter-gatherer, 30-40% farmer, 20-30% steppe—formed the Nordic Bronze Age, evolving into Iron Age Germanic tribes.

The Viking Age (793–1066 CE) emerged from overpopulation, climatic shifts, and technological advances like longships. Vikings weren't a unified people but Norse farmers, traders, and warriors from Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, expanding to Iceland, Greenland, and beyond. Haplogroup H, peaking at 40-50% in Scandinavians, reflects this European heritage, with no Beringian ties.

reddit.com

allinonehomeschool.com

Climate Showdown: Beringia's Extremes vs. Scandinavia's Temperate Edge

During the LGM, Beringia was a cold, dry steppe-tundra, with July temperatures ~4°C cooler and January ~2°C cooler than modern equivalents—overall harsher than habitable European zones. Scandinavia itself was largely ice-covered, forcing humans to southern refugia like Iberia, where winters were milder (4-8°C cooler) with more precipitation and diverse resources.

Post-LGM, Europe warmed rapidly, fostering forests and agriculture by 10,000 BCE. Beringia remained Arctic-like, with persistent cold driving adaptations in its descendants. Viking-era Scandinavia experienced the Medieval Warm Period (~900–1300 CE), aiding expansion, but winters were still brutal—sea ice trapped ships, and storms delayed voyages. Beringia's isolation amplified selection pressures, while Scandinavia's connectivity allowed cultural exchanges.

Daily Life: Survival in the Deep Freeze

Beringian life revolved around mobility: hunting megafauna with atlatls, fishing in icy rivers, and sheltering in semi-subterranean dwellings insulated with sod and bones. Diets were high in protein and fat from seals and caribou, with minimal carbs—essential for thermogenesis in -20°C winters.

Vikings, in a more temperate yet variable climate, farmed barley and rye in short summers, herded sheep and cattle, and fished cod. Winters meant indoor activities: storytelling, crafting, and feasting on preserved foods like butter-laden porridge. High-fat dairy and meat diets (35-40% fat) fueled them through dark months, with no evidence of widespread heart disease due to intense activity and short lifespans (30-40 years). Social adaptations included communal longhouses for warmth and Viking raids for resources during harsh years.

Genomic and Physical Adaptations: Evolving for the Cold

Beringian descendants, like the Inuit, exhibit profound cold adaptations per Bergmann's and Allen's rules: shorter limbs, broader chests/torsos to minimize heat loss, and flatter facial features (including potentially smaller breasts) to reduce frostbite risk. Visceral fat storage around organs provides insulation and energy, enabled by genes like CPT1A for efficient fat metabolism on marine diets rich in omega-3s. These mutations lower LDL cholesterol and insulin, aiding survival but raising modern risks like diabetes with Western diets.

Scandinavians show milder adaptations: stockier builds and pale skin for vitamin D synthesis in low sun, but more external fat storage (e.g., in hips and breasts) due to calorie surpluses from farming. Haplogroup H may link to metabolic efficiency, but Vikings relied more on cultural tools—wool clothing, skis, and ships—than genetic extremes. Larger breasts in some European women tie to estrogen and nutrition, not cold selection.

gjia.georgetown.edu

downtoearth.org.in

nordicperspective.com

livescience.com

Aftermath: Legacies in a Warming World

Beringian migrants populated the Americas, their adaptations persisting in Inuit genomes, now challenged by climate change—melting ice disrupts hunting, while dietary shifts amplify health issues. Vikings' expansions faded with the Little Ice Age (~1300 CE), but their genes influence modern Scandinavians, who face fewer cold extremes thanks to technology.

These stories remind us: Human adaptation is dynamic. As global warming reshapes the Arctic, understanding these ancient resiliences could inform future survival strategies.

What do you think—could Viking butter feasts or Inuit fat-metabolism genes inspire modern diets?

Anti-Sanity Democrats Declare Trump Insane For Netting Maduro

 Leading Democrats acted swiftly to declare President Trump insane following the capture of Venezuelan former President Maduro. Democrats have redefined insanity to mean political enemy. In that regard Democrats evolved to be the anti-sanity party, since the electoral majority are politically sane by conventional standards.

  On the socialist agenda, Maduro was a resistance hero. For real politics he was a terrible loser. Hopefully the new Venezuelan president will not resist prosperity the next three years, much less spend the lives of her citizens in a senseless conflict with international forces trying to reestablish free enterprise and democracy in Venezuela with drug trafficking to the USA. Siding with anti-sanity political forces would be a gravely wrong choice. The United States has no colonies and never will. The new president of Venezuela shouldn't be mired in the anachronistic rhetoric of anti-sanity Marxist revolutionaries that just creates war and inefficiency in economics. Democracy with an intelligent electorate works best.

  In the old days assassination of corrupt foreign leaders was lawful. That changed in the 20th century after WW2 when people sought international stability. People eventually learn to take advantage of international legal situations and loopholes to let corruption flourish, so laws need to be upgraded to remedy the way things are in the present.  The UN would have let Saddam Hussein lead Iraq forever, and dictators anywhere felt secure from foreign military intervention at least until President Obama took  out Muammar Gaddafi- via CIA support for Libyan rebels; letting civil war, anarchy and Isis flourish in Libya.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Libya

President Trump cannot let civil war develop and anarcho-terrorism continue in Venezuela. Powerful nations will not long tolerate neighboring nations to be inimical; harming them without bringing consequences to the mockers. That is from the rule of power, of which the rule of law is a subset. The media of course would like another Ukraine to develop in Venezuela and will encourage polemical parameters to support that vector/prospect.

https://www.axios.com/2026/01/03/trump-venezuela-maduro-democrats-congress

Maduro Captured; Zohran Mamdami Next?

Overnight Venezuelan Dictator President Maduro was captured following the inauguration of the socialist Zohran (Karl Marx) Mamdami to be Mayor of New York. Mamdami has pledged ‘to end rugged individualism’ in New York and render everyone docile, malleable pawns of party leaders. Yet what is of concern are potential secret plans to socialize the New York Stock Exchange after expropriating the funds invested there via some clever financial coup d'etat of taxation. Maybe Mayor Mamdami will show investors how to really invest in blockchain.

Will former Dictator-Maduro face the same suicidal death as Jeffrey Epstein while in jail, or will he be kept out of New York City dungeons and be given a hero’s welcome and a ticker tape parade? Maduro is being transported to Manhattan for charges in the U.S. Southern District Court of New York. This is the twin towers perp walk effect; setting an example for Mayor Mamdami? If after interrogation, would he be willing to become converted to a supporter of Donald Trump after confessing that he hadn’t realized the brilliance of our leader since he was so bogged down with the details of managing socialist affairs in Venezuela?

I was trying to find something funny to write about the overnight events and didn’t fare well. I guess the actual events will speak for themselves.

Defunding N.Y.C. Police could be next on the agenda for drawing New York City and the nation farther into the chthonic takeover of state socialism. Social media corporations are loaded with party loyalists willing to censor free speech in innovative ways.

 Defunding police may be a cost saving measure since there are many gangs willing to step into the void and provide security and protection for small and large businesses off sidewalks for free, or at least for a small percent piece-of-the-action service charge. 

The Mayor could end homelessness synthetically recombining new technology with new urban design. While President Trump is making fossil fuel and democracy great again in Venezuela Mayor Mamdami could find it feasible to eliminate automobiles from the city, replace them with fast moving wind and solar  powered sidewalks and make odd numbered streets new building spaces for innovative homeless housing structures and super-conducting, hydrogen cooled power lines.

Mindful ( a poem)

 

An examination of experience
from cradle to the grave
learning to be and become

While wars slathered with perfidy of a world rave
God provides life with the Holy Spirit
bringing thought to life and futures to see

Drawing the saved closer to the eternal
God evolves one closer to meaning
perfect dreams may not occur in time
though miracles for wonder may begin

Rainbows becoming materialized spheres
elements in minutes spanning distances for years
instantaneous sections become too much to be
what is life, that thou art mindful of it?

https://suno.com/s/3lgZnSm4mI9lEtru Mindful (the song)

Berengia Refugia (poetry)

Wind swept tundra Iŋaliq high
reaching upward forever into the midnight sky
stars shown across lakes and rivers
eternity hunting game with Atlatals and shivers

My joy ride pony was a snack in the dark
life wasn't just a walk in the park
for the scimitar-toothed cat that left hooves and blood
winter carnivores too would perish in mud
from clouds of spears thrown like cold structured rhymes

Glowing green arms of sky through night's waves
showed where the predator hunted
drawn to firelight raves
sending life ending points, arm's countless flicks
an x tribe refugia lasted consisted eleven thousand years

There is nothing to the future, except the future itself..

https://suno.com/s/PREKO1r8XM0rRbGW Berengia Refugia (song)

Author note: I wrote this poem in the first person narrative, yet the narrator sees the future and writes as an omniscient narrator too. Considering that reminded me of what Winston Churchill said (approximately paraphrased with a lot of fiction thrown in); "There is nothing to the future, except the future itself!"