that's why im here to let you all know that Austin Steinbart is an important part of this movement. but there needs to be more free thinkers here to get on board with him before we can move forward.
Hmmmm. I don't really think that the one's on board with Mr S, are free thinkers.
Kinda like the sheeple that think THEY are the rational ones, who follow the science and are applying logic.
Well, yes, they are, within a tiny, winey itty bitty little locked off space, one that they cannot conceive outside of. In that little space, they imagine they are free thinkers.
Steinbart, like all conjurors, relies on your emotional defects in order to capture your attention and affection.
youre speaking in generalizations. why is that? is there something specifically you can point to that supports what youre saying? If steinbart was anonymous, would you then consider his information for evaluating? Why do you refuse to evaluate it? Is it because you dislike the messenger? Would you ignore good, pertinent information just because you dont like the source? does that make sense?
my emotions play no role in my consumption and analysis of information. Vacuum it all up, use discernment to find my truth. Truth resonates deeply within. Q should have taught you that. We dont need gatekeepers or arbiters of truth. Free thinking is about learning the truth on your own. Refusing to look into steinbart is counterproductive to learning the truth.
that's why im here to let you all know that Austin Steinbart is an important part of this movement. but there needs to be more free thinkers here to get on board with him before we can move forward.
https://3speak.tv/user/austinsteinbart
lets see how many free thinkers downvote me ;)
Hmmmm. I don't really think that the one's on board with Mr S, are free thinkers.
Kinda like the sheeple that think THEY are the rational ones, who follow the science and are applying logic.
Well, yes, they are, within a tiny, winey itty bitty little locked off space, one that they cannot conceive outside of. In that little space, they imagine they are free thinkers.
Steinbart, like all conjurors, relies on your emotional defects in order to capture your attention and affection.
youre speaking in generalizations. why is that? is there something specifically you can point to that supports what youre saying? If steinbart was anonymous, would you then consider his information for evaluating? Why do you refuse to evaluate it? Is it because you dislike the messenger? Would you ignore good, pertinent information just because you dont like the source? does that make sense?
my emotions play no role in my consumption and analysis of information. Vacuum it all up, use discernment to find my truth. Truth resonates deeply within. Q should have taught you that. We dont need gatekeepers or arbiters of truth. Free thinking is about learning the truth on your own. Refusing to look into steinbart is counterproductive to learning the truth.