Oh Ick. Appropriate language has to be
used again! For some reason the Scum that can only be described with
Appropriate Language -- still exist.
*************************
Calibration Example 1:
“He doesn't care what they say about
him. That is why we listen to him.”
Wrong. Here we have an ideal example of
the need for calibration. The above statement is often said by people
who are talking to other persons who are either Illiterates or TV
Watchers (same thing) or Idiot Voters (same things) and who are
yacking (between doggie biscuits) something negative about 'Peters'.
I appreciate the efforts of my readers
and anyone else who tries to defend the Truth before persons who are
lame-brained from exposure to Queer Propaganda; but don't you think
it would be better to go into the details a little more? What harm
can it do? TV Watchers and Idiot Voters have less memory cells
between their ears than a $10 pocket calculator; and will forget what
you said to them as soon as they have walked ten steps away from you.
And yet! Truth will have been better served with calibration!
The calibration in this case is ... The
Turds of Queer Propaganda are so hideous and anti-Human that no Human
listens to any feces that spits forth from their anal faces.
Henceforth, no Human has the faintest idea of what that feces is. It
doesn't matter, because the turds do not matter. Therefore, no
Human is ignoring or 'not caring' that any such feces may purportedly
be about them -- in any sub-language or sub-gutterance. We do not
'not care' what the turds of Queer Propaganda are saying about us --
because we have no idea that the turds could be trying to say
anything about us. And, to change a turd of Queer Propaganda from
what it is today into some kind of thing that could actually
say something (in some language) would require so many decades of
brain surgeries and subsequent lessons [starting with Reader 1] that
everyone would have forgotten what the reasons were for the
operations within a few years.
Thinking that Humans could 'not care'
about what Queer Propaganda is saying about them, is like implying
that Humans could 'not care' what the toilet bowls in Hell are saying
right now.
----------
Calibration Example 2:
“We will bring civilization and law
and order to the Galaxy. When we finally get there, that is.” So
said the Politician.
Bullshit. It is all about economics and
more customers, even if they never wanted anything from us and we
have to enslave them to sell them anything.
----------
Calibration Example 3:
“Abortion is all about the Body
Rights of Women” So said the Lesie-Turd.
Cow Pies. It is all about mind control
and Big Queer Business, even though no woman has ever
wanted anything from them and has to be brainwashed to buy
anything from them. No matter how awful.
----------
Calibration Example 4:
Universe and Universal.
What does 'Universe' mean?
What do we call the 'Universe'?
Is it 'Universal'?
What is 'Universal'?
As you read these explanations from
other sources, keep in mind the dismal reality of today; the Politics
Game is forever corrupt and senseless and a plague upon the lives of
all Humans. That is a Universal Fact and a Universal
Constant. Until the
voting stops and the game either collapses or voting is made
mandatory and Dictatorial Oligarchies become the main competitors
in a new and very violent Politics Game. In which, Humans will be
treated as temporary cattle, fit only for worshiping the Filthy
Monkeys of the FM Band.
-----
The terms 'Universe' and 'Universal'
are defined as follows:
-----
Universe -- 1. The aggregate of
all existing things; the whole creation; in restricted sense, the
Earth.___2. Human Beings collectively; mankind.___3. All objects,
collectively, that are the subjects of consideration at once.
Universal -- 1. Relating to the
entire Universe; of or pertaining to persons or things regarded
collectively or distributively; belonging to the whole Earth or to
all Human Beings; all embracing; unlimited; general.___2. Common to
all in any specific group.___3. Regarded or existing as a whole;
entire.___4. Suited to all purposes and conditions.___5. (Logic)
Including all of a logical class. [1] Predicable of all the
individuals of an ideal class of which the existence is assumed but
not known. [2] Predicable of all the individuals of a class the
consists of a limited aggregation of individuals, as of all the
individuals of a biological species, genus, family, or other group
similarly aggregated; opposed to particular;
as, a universal
proposition.
(Philosophy) A universal concept; that which may be predicated of
many particular things or persons.
Practical Standard Dictionary of the English Language
Funk & Wagnalls [1926]
-----
Universe
-- 1. All existing things, including the earth, the heavens, the
galaxies, and all therein, regarded as a whole.___2a. The earth
together with all its creatures.___2b. All mankind.___3. A distinct
sphere or realm, as of the imagination, that exists as an independent
unit. (Logic) The universe of discourse.
Universal
-- 1. Including, extending to, or affecting the entire world or all
within the world: WORLDWIDE <a universal drought> <universal
hunger>___2. Relating to, involving, or affecting all the members
of a class or group <the universal concerns of parenthood>___3.
Applicable or common to all uses, situations, or conditions <a
universal language>___4. Of or relating to the universe or cosmos:
COSMIC___5. Comprehensively broad in subject matter.
(Logic) A universal proposition. A general or abstract concept or
term considered absolute or axiomatic.
(Logic) A general or widely held principle, concept, or notion.
(Logic) A trait or pattern of behavior, characteristic of all the
members of a particular culture or of all Human Beings.
New Riverside University Dictionary [1984]
----
Universal
-- (Philosophy) A metaphysical entity characterized by repeatability
and unchanging nature through a series of changing relations, as
substance.
New World Dictionary of American English. 3rd Edition. [1988]
-----
Universals
-- (excerpts from The Encyclopedia of Philosophy 1967)
The following
is forbidden knowledge and banned from all Queer Medias.
Volume Eight. Page 194.
The
word 'universal,' used as a noun, has belonged to the vocabulary of
English-writing philosophers since the sixteenth century, but the
concepts of universals, and the problems raised by it, has a far
longer history. It goes back through the universalia
of medieval philosophy to Aristotle and Plato. Indeed, Plato may be
taken to be the father of this perennial topic of philosophy, for it
is in his dialogues that we find the first arguments for universals
and the first discussion of the difficulties they raise. Plato
believed that the existence of universals was required not only
ontologically, [[metaphysically]] to explain the nature of the world
which as sentient and reflective beings we experience, but also
epistemologically, [[philosophically]] to explain the nature of our
experience of it. He proposed a solution to his problem, but he also
recognized the objections to his particular solution. Ever since,
except for intervals of neglect, philosophers have been worrying
about the nature and status of universals. No account has yet been
propounded which has come near to receiving universal acceptance;
this reflects not merely disagreement on the answers to be offered
but also, and perhaps more importantly, disagreement on exactly what
the questions are that we are, or should be, trying to answer.
That
in some sense or other there are universals, and that in some sense
or other they are abstract objects --that is, objects of thought
rather than sense perception--no philosopher would wish to dispute;
the difficulties begin when we try to be more precise. They may be
indicated (although not defined) by the abstract nouns which we use
when we think about, for example, beauty, justice, courage, and
goodness and, again, by the adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and
prepositions which we use in talking of individual objects, to refer
to their qualities and to the relations between them. In saying of
two or more objects that each is a table, or square, or brown, or
made of wood we are saying that there is something common to the
objects, which may be shared by many others and in virtue of which
the objects may be classified into kinds. Not merely is such
classification possible, for scientific and other purposes; it is
unavoidable: all experience is of things as belonging to kinds,
however vague and inarticulate the classification may be. Whatever we
see (to take sight as an example) we see as a something
-- that is, as an object of a certain kind, as having certain
qualities, and as standing in certain relations to other objects --
and although every individual object is unique, in that it is
numerically distinct from all others, its features are general, in
that they are (or might be) repeated in other objects.
Even if there were only one red object in the world, we would know
what it would be like for there to be others, and we would be able to
recognize another if we were to meet with it.
Generality
is an essential feature of the objects of experience, recognition of
generality is an essential feature of experience itself, and
reflection of this generality is shown in vocabulary of any language,
all the words of which (with the exception of proper names) are
general.
Universals are, by tradition, contrasted with particulars, the
general contrasted with the numerically unique, and differing
theories of universals are differing accounts of what is involved in
this generality and in our experience of it. The leading theories of
universals--realism, conceptualism, nominalism, and resemblance
theories--can best be explained by an examination of the doctrines of
the main exponents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Encyclopedia_of_Philosophy
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/universals-medieval/
https://iep.utm.edu/universa/
https://philosophynews.com/the-third-man-argument-part-1/
https://sacredstructures.org/general/what-does-the-bible-say-about-oneness/
https://webot.org/info/en/?search=Universal_proposition
https://www.britannica.com/topic/realism-philosophy/Universals
If you read these websites you will get a beginner's idea of what
'Universals' is about.
*************************
As
for myself, I have created another video for you to watch (if you
will) that explains again how totally uncaring I am about anything
that happens within the horrible Politics Game. This video cannot be
watched by non-Humans (and should not be) so do not worry about any
reactions about it from the Scuzz. All that those Voting Mindless
Idiots can do is to complain about whatever
their owners and operators tell
them to complain about.
They cannot know what they are really complaining about.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15wH-Cll8nZmOa2U6QJKYVLDR73I2KNnL/view?usp=sharing
This video is 1280x720p and is 5 Gigabytes. I tried to make a smaller
(576p) version but the sound sync will not work at that resolution.
*************************
I was going to end this there, but I am thinking about the concept of
'added value'. I should add something that will help you in times
like this -- such as websites about the futility of voting ...
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Futility+of+voting.-a0131490702
https://5pillarsuk.com/2015/04/25/the-futility-of-british-democracy/
https://www.quotemaster.org/Futility
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/word-about-futility-politics-in-west-on-election-tuesday-in-america/
https://yournz.org/2017/08/21/the-futility-of-modern-democracy/
https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-Vote-Futility-American-Electoral/dp/1540459152
https://rense.com/general58/voting.htm
https://www.likhoon.com/what-is-the-main-reason-for-not-voting-quizlet/
'After increasing for many decades,
there has been a trend of decreasing voter turnout in most
established democracies since the 1980s. In general, low turnout is
attributed to disillusionment, indifference, or a sense of futility
(the perception that ones vote wont make any difference).'
https://thinkhardthinkwell.com/2010/05/09/uk-elections-and-the-futility-of-voting/
https://openthemagazine.com/features/india/why-voting-is-futile/
https://newint.org/features/2022/02/07/long-read-politics-futility
https://medium.com/@LatentAxiom/why-voting-is-an-exercise-in-futility-488657f4522a
https://katehon.com/en/article/futility-electoral-politics
At this time the scum on the Queer Medias are pretending that there
are huge voter turnouts for this episode of Worthless Elections. Do
you believe them? Have they ever said anything that can be believed?
*************************
Markel Peters
https://voices-of-iowa.blogspot.com/
https://voices-of-iowa-concise.blogspot.com/