Onii-Chan

Goddamn, you fucking killed him dude.

This is one of the most incredible things I’ve ever seen. The complexity of life just continues to astound me.

Reality is a dream. Try to enjoy it while you’re here.

Depends on the Ford. imo Ford Australia’s final two Falcon models were unkillable, and contained an engine everyone’s now wanting to get their hands on due to its bulletproof construction and potential for huge, cheap power.

Source; I’ve owned an FG Falcon from new which now has over 450,000km on it and never once had any issues (also thousands of taxi drivers over 15 years can’t be wrong.)

Do it, boi. One of us. One of us.

Whilst I agree with you in that consciousness is the true nature of the universe, it’s science and its disciplines that will slowly help us understand what it actually is and why we even experience existence in the first place.

Well fucking said.

It’s fucking surreal to see not only this, but the amount that Google knows about Pyongyang. I did try to get directions to the concentration camp lol

“These aren’t windows, they’re just sophisticated high resolution 3D monitors. NASA has had this tech for decades, they’ve just never let the secret out. You’re not seeing the Earth, you’re seeing a video. Why can’t we go see it with our own eyes outside? Exactly. Seems very convenient we’re being asked to wear suits with image projection helmets.”

You will never win with people this fucking stupid.

Audibly encouraging fights among males literally ties into the theory. The hypothesis is that female moaning attracts nearby males, the males want to procreate, but only one male’s genetics are going to actually form a child, and it is in the species’ best interests for that child to contain the DNA of the most-likely-to-survive and procreate. It doesn’t matter whether the guys all form an orderly queue to some daily gangbang (which was absolutely NOT the case), or start fighting amongst themselves to be the only one with a chance (which includes the possibility that another had ejaculated inside her prior to this) - the purpose of her vocalizing was to encourage males in the area to compete, especially if she’s already in the middle of the act. There’s enough merit here to suggest further study into the area, especially given that neither of our theories are proven.

You seem to be fixated on an argument I’ve not made, and I may not have worded it clearly enough. I’m not suggesting that primitive human females started moaning in an attempt to initiate a gangbang because cave-dwelling women were insatiable whores or whatever. I’m suggesting that those vocalizations were a method to incite breeding competition between males in the area, and that this aids natural selection.

Except there is clearly a potential link that deserves further study to come to a conclusion? There’s more credibility backing this being a possible origin than there is to the argument “stupid horny male scientists like thinking about caveman gangbangs. Social construct, guys.”

I’d like to hear an actual counter theory that isn’t hiding behind identity politics or an emotional response. I’ve already stated that this hypothesis isn’t concrete fact, but you’re being willfully ignorant if you don’t believe there’s any merit to it.

OP asked a question, I (and a few others) posted a possible answer. The pushback against this theory in particular seems to stem not from a place of reason, but from a place of emotion. I’d love to see genuine refutation to this theory, because it certainly isn’t concrete fact, but when the only thing I see is “lol stupid horny men and their fantasies” and “where were the WOMEN on this scientific study?” you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t think they’re worth entertaining as good faith rebuttals.

Get a load of all the people calling bullshit on my comment lmao.

I didn’t just make this up, it’s a legitimate hypothesis. Someone else posted a wiki link to it (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_copulatory_vocalizations)

Not everything is some patriarchal social conditioning conspiracy, dude.

I don’t know how I know the answer to this, and I’ll try to keep it brief and simplify something more complex than I can go into given I’m typing on my phone, but here goes:

This goes wayyyyyyy back into our past as human beings. Women largely vocalize more than men during sex as a way to signal to other males in the area that sex is happening and that they should join in. It’s encouragement for the male, but it goes deeper (heh) than that - the human penis is quite large as far as body to dick ratio for animals goes, and there are two reasons for that; the head is designed to ‘scoop’ competing males’ semen out with each thrust in preparation for replacing it with the dick-haver’s own, while the longer shaft allows deeper penetration in order to scoop as much as possible.

So basically, when a woman moans loudly, it’s signifying she’s ready to go, and that the strongest male in a group will be the one to eventually impregnate her. It’s literally a survival of the fittest mechanism.

Now obviously that isn’t the reason for it these days, as we’re all aware that our intelligence as a species makes sex a vastly more complex thing than it is for other animals at this point in our evolutionary path, but that’s what researchers believe is the origin of sexy female noises.

EDIT: This is a legitimate hypothesis. Not everything is some modern social construct with no link to any evolutionary advantages and survival of the fittest. I’m sorry if this challenges your narrow worldview.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_copulatory_vocalizations

Legitimately invest a shitload into Bitcoin before cashing out at the top of the last bull market we just had (waiting a good number of years until then just having fun being young.) I’d then buy a plot of land in the middle of nowhere, set it up to be completely off-grid (as much as can be done, anyway), and then live happily in peaceful isolation while the world burns itself to the fucking ground and I hopefully die before I hit 60.

Unfortunately I didn’t do any of that in 2013, so I’m still working on step one here in 2023… whatever the hell the right move is in 2023.

Again, if the perpetrator instead happened to be a far right terrorist instead, this same response would NOT be happening, and you know that. This is a case of media bias and suppression, and you can dress it up any way you like. There are plenty of ways in which cases like these SHOULD be handled by the media, but historically aren’t. Why is this particular case so special? Why are news organizations and big tech platforms trying so desperately to bury this particular case, when their response wasn’t such for high profile far right terrorist/racially-motivated attacks in recent years? It’s not like the media has ever given a shit about doing the right thing. If you truly believe these platforms operate on objective reasoning, then why have they never employed it until now? It couldn’t be that the difference between this attack and others is that Nashville just happens to have been acted out in the name of anti-white hate (based on the shooter’s own writings and political ideology?)

Media companies only care about profit. Mass shootings are guaranteed profit for large media companies, and history has shown that they will happily share any story guaranteed to bring in more revenue and spark outrage, especially given that any fines issued for breach of confidential legal information will pale in comparison to the revenue earned. So what’s so special about this one? It’s the first in a long, long time to run counter to the mainstream media and big tech’s generally left wing narrative. They’re protecting their own. If you look into the HRC and CEI, which most of America’s large media companies are beholden to, then there are genuine financial consequences for not staying in line and protecting the ideology they espouse.

I’m sorry, but I don’t buy your argument on this. We fundamentally disagree here.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that if the suspect’s political ideology were far right, that the media and large tech platforms would be employing the exact same response. This isn’t a matter of legal proceedings, it’s glaringly-obvious demonstration of what mainstream media and their counterparts will do in order to silence any story that may damage the credibility of their beliefs. This was an anti-white hate crime. It is being suppressed. If this were an anti-black hate crime, it would be covered worldwide, court orders be damned - and you know it.

For the record, I think the guy is a massive fucking dickhead, but he originally broke the story, and imo, did the right thing here. His Twitter is a good place to start: https://nitter.net/scrowder

The evidence seems pretty damning from what I’ve read. Confirmed authentic by Nashville police, too. Big tech and the media seem to be scrambling to cover up and censor the manifesto story as quickly as possible. Make of that what you will… but if this were a right wing terrorist, it’d be news the world over, and nobody would have had an issue with it. The writings shown in the leaks make it very clear that the shootings were racially-motivated - and had been planned for months.