The "Hundredth Monkey" Effect and the Modern Western "Agenda"

a reply to: RussianTroll

But unlike many British people with whom I do not communicate on the forum,

You do not communicate because of the typical base emotion of fear. People say fight or flight response but miss out the other reactions like freeze and also ignore, I find the last one interesting in human behaviour??

That is what it boils down to and makes me chuckle every time. Your refusal to except anything that goes against your base cognative bias leads you to ignore the people who show your "facts" to be false, which creates a fear driven response.
It's simple and very basic human behaviour.

Then you're driven by anger to respond with your hate filled threads about Great Britain. It's the same pattern every time. It makes you feel big and intelligent being able to insult an entire culture and people, but in actual fact it's the opposite.

It's actually a subject connected to your thread, how fear and also the fear of the unknown can alter society.

a reply to: Freeborn

You've convinced me))) I'm stopping the discussion with you on this topic. It's probably unpleasant for you to hear the truth.

a reply to: RussianTroll

"The English have not liked the Russians since the time of the Crimean temnik Mamai, who went to Rus', which ended in the famous Battle of Kulikovo, where Mamai was defeated, and Rus' stopped paying tribute to the Horde. Many bankers from Belgium, Holland, Lombardy, Genoa and Venice invested in Mamai's campaign in the hope of robbing Rus'. The Genoese even sent their warriors. The investments (enormous at that time) collapsed. Later, these same bankers from Lombardy and Belgium invested in Cromwell, won a victory and became the founders of the Bank of England. But they did not forget the loss of their investments in Russia. This is the origin of England's hatred of Russia, even despite the fact that the imperial courts of both countries were related."

I think you will find that "the English" (apart from maybe a few historians) neither know or give a monkey's about these matters.

a reply to: RussianTroll

I am afraid your analysis is all too correct. It seems the West will need to go through the experience of the Soviet Union before waking up to common sense

a reply to: RussianTroll

FFS RT, stop being a dick.

Its not that's it's 'uncomfortable', nothing of the sort.
Rather I would have preferred reading about some of the stuff you and other members posted which are completely unrelated to the anti-British bollocks you insist on posting all the bloody time.

This thread had potential to be quite interesting, now its just another boring and predictable vehicle for you to post your revisionist anti-UK bigotry and us Brits to reply to you.

Its boring and becoming very #ing tedious.
Another ruined thread.....such a shame.

a reply to: Freeborn

Your name, has also gone in the book.

a reply to: Tolkien

The West does not have vassal States like the late unlamented USSR did to break it up.

a reply to: Freeborn

Well, here you are, slipping into personal insults. And your further desire to look respectable in this case is simply ridiculous.
I will not call you the same word that you called me. Otherwise you will immediately start screaming about Russian aggression)))
It's a pity, I tried to establish an adequate dialogue with you.

a reply to: RussianTroll

I called you that because you were acting like one.
I know you are far, far better than that.

Concentrate on the subject of your OP because it is quite an interesting topic instead of deliberately provoking with your non-stop niggles and petty insults. It really does you no favours RT.

Now lets have a quick drink together. 🥂

Well….

The 100 Monkeys and the follow-up scientific posts were interesting.

Then the posts drifted WAY off topic.

a reply to: Freeborn

As you continually bait, insult and threaten us Brits the reactions (which you obviously crave) should not come as a surprise.

We have a saying "don't dish it out if you can't take it".

I'd like to hear more about the topic of your thread, without your digs at us, please.




Oops! Fat fingers...that was meant to be a reply to RT!

a reply to: Freeborn

So you, mister, were the first to focus the conversation with me on my supposedly anti-British rhetoric. I answered you adequately. You ended with personal insults.
I am truly sorry that you are succumbing to the policy of personal insults on national grounds that reign among the British.(((

a reply to: RussianTroll

I give up with you RT.

Reread the thread.
I really can't be arsed to engage in any more of this petty bickering....I'm bored with it, # knows how bored other people must be.

a reply to: RussianTroll

And then I remembered the theory of psychologist Dr. Kinsey, who claimed that the natural threshold of perversion in society is 5%. Then, upon reaching 10%, a qualitative leap occurs. And when the amount of degeneration in society reaches 2/3 (66% or 666 out of a thousand according to the Apocalypse in the Revelations of John the Theologian), then this society with a 100% probability dies out, self-destructs.
Is this happening now in the West? After all, if the Lord wants to destroy Society, he deprives its members of reason.

I'm sure most people past a certain age have heard of the Kinsey Reports. My guess would be that for every 1 who has read them, 10,000 or so have heard critiques in magazines or sermons. I would like to know where you get the numbers 5%, 10%, and 2/3 from.

As far as the Lord goes; I think that Dionysus is very much misunderstood. There is a great difference between the liberation of a little wine, song, dance, and theater; and the thing called "divine madness". The divine madness or frenzy is actually a curse which results in killings and such.

A moderator suggested people look up "If by Whiskey", so I did.
Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat Jr. 1952 speech on the floor of the Mississippi state legislature concerning whiskey.

My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, this is how I feel about whiskey:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.
If-by-whiskey

a reply to: FullHeathen

From a pure scientific and chemistry point of view, alcohol is, a "solution".

a reply to: RussianTroll

I love a good story...but this one fails the sniff test (no slight to the OP). This is one that I want to be true to appeal to my sense of mystery but...

The 100th Monkey Effect is based on the paper, [citation] Kawamura, S. (1959). "The process of sub-culture propagation among Japanese macaques." Primates, 2(1), 43-60 [/citation]. This paper outlines the spread of the behavior in the local population (100-150 individuals). So the hundredth monkey would be in the 100 - 65th percentile, hardly noteworthy.

The original research on the macaques did show that potato-washing behavior spread within the monkey troop on Koshima Island, but there was no evidence of the behavior spreading to monkeys on other islands. The more extraordinary claim of knowledge spreading without physical contact has never been scientifically verified.

Lyall Watson, a scientist and writer who wrote about it in his 1979 book Lifetide. Watson admitted that he exaggerated and even invented parts of the story.

The "Hundredth Monkey Effect" is largely metaphorical, and the actual percentage of the population associated with the "hundredth monkey" has never been scientifically calculated. In the story popularized by Lyall Watson in his book Lifetide, the specific number “100” was used symbolically to suggest that once a critical mass of monkeys adopted a behavior, it spread more rapidly. However, this was not based on rigorous data, and the number 100 was likely chosen for its narrative impact.

Once again, intrigued but disappointed. Kudos, though, to RT for bringing this foward!

a reply to: RussianTroll

"Those who the Gods wish to destroy first go mad'

a reply to: LetsGoViking

Knowledge is information and according to the quantum realm if two particles became entangled they would share that information...
take the newly found quantum tubes in our brain that suggest our very way of thinking is connected all the way down to the quantum realm, things like a shared consciousness aren't so far fetched.
There is also this idea of a morphogenetic field that shares information among species that resonate at the same frequencies.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Best solution that I've found so far for erasing permanent markers.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Obviously a reference how sheep follow/copy other sheep.