Sunday, February 15, 2026
An own state is not the universal right of every nation, Anti-Zionism is not Hypocrisy or Double Standard
SSPX & Rome Reunion? Catholic Kicked Off Panel; Muslim Mayor Snubs Catholics | CATHOLIC NEWS ROUNDUP
Christine Niles | 13 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grP4mvBFDQE
Ari Berman!
When did you last stand up for the right of Gipsies, Sorbs, Lapps, First Nations, Catalans, Basques (I could probably go on, but these are the cases I know best) to have their own state?
And the right of Palestinians to have their own state?
Carrie Prejean Boller, you rock!
Élites Promote Evolution: a Conspiracy, Not a Theory
A little more than one century ago, the US philanthropist Carnegie funded scientific institutions on condition they promote Evolution. I obviously prefer his Swedish relatives that started the brewery for Carnegie Porter.
Epstein Files REVEALED: Why was he pushing evolution?
LSNTV | 13 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j9U9I25ysY
5:33 One harmonious system.
On the astronomic scale too? With Geocentrism, the answer is yes.
6:29 "first time"
No. Julien Offray de La Mettrie was an Atheist, while Jean Le Rond d'Alembert and Denis Diderot gravitated into that direction.
How come this was possible in the 18th C. while it was clearly absent from the 13th?
Heliocentrism.
12:09 About the frequency of mutations and the time it takes for one to take over an entire population too.
So far, you are underestimating the impossibility of "big picture evolution" (like more radical than pepper moths or hedgehogs diversifying into species and even genera).
You haven't mentioned that some functions require more than one gene.
My favourite example since a few years ago is the retina of ... not sure if it was Astyanax Jordani or some blind cichlid, I think a cave in Mexico was mentioned, indicating as I look up the former, and then blind cichlids (indicating Congo river, other side of the Atlantic) could be a false memory.
Either way, the blind fish in question has ten genes for retina development. Two of them are damaged with a mutation or two. When coupled with relatives of non-blind populations, the hybrid isn't blind, the mutations are recessive.
So, ten genes, and getting only two things wrong on two of them is enough to make the retina non-functional.
However, this cannot be what St. Paul talked about, since genes and these blind fish have not been studied since the beginning of creation. Day and night, summer and winter, new moon and full moon have.
14:21 This case is not from biology, but from linguistics.
Human language functions on certain bases.
The logical bases involve:
- concepts can be named for themselves, not just as part of a pragmatic signal ("food" doesn't mean "let's eat" and "lion" doesn't mean "lion danger, lets climb the trees")
- they can be named in different types of absence : past, future, hidden, far, negated, conditional.
But the thing that makes this possible is:
- sentences are broken down into concept signals, known technically as morphemes (usually words, but also endings, prefixes and a few more), neither or none of which denotes a complete sentence ("let us eat some food" has five parts, and none of them gives the pragmatic signal by itself)
- morphemes are broken down into non-signals that only code for difference ("eat" and "ease" differ by T from Z sounds, neither of which has any meaning).
The corresponding things in "monkey talk" are:
- usually one signal per "concept"
- and that signal either one sound or a regular back and forth, but not a direction specific sequence of different sounds
- usually only pragmatic and emotic "concepts" ("I'm worried you look sad" or "lion danger, let's climb the trees" are two concepts, while "sad" and "trees" aren't)
These are linked. With very limited capacity to differentiate signals, you don't have the room for discussions about interesting topics, you just have the room for pragmatics and emotics, the equivalent of languages entirely in traffic signs and emoticons, no rebus involved.
So, how would the latter change into the former? Increasing vocabulary by subdividing such concepts by sound sequences would be pointless, if each "word" is an entire signal and learning one means to learn how to respond to yet another type situation. But increasing sentences by subdivision into theoretic concepts, into topics, would be impossible if the "vocabulary" remained as limited.
Even more.
- chimpanzees cannot hear consonants (outer ear too thick)
- chimpanzees cannot pronounce pure vowels (hyoid tied to air bags for distortion and amplification)
- chimpanzees, by absence of Broca's and Wernicke's areas and a human version of the FOXP-2 gene cannot learn vocabulary, properly. Or vocabulary and sentence structure.
In the pretended line from "Ramapithecus" (ancestral to chimps and men, according to evolution) to us, there are only three categories of skeleta:
- all of above traits (when found) human (even if Homo erectus had somewhat thicker ears, and might not have heard T, but could have heard CH or K, which are less shrill)
- none of above traits (when found) human (Australopithecus, for instance)
- the skull is too damaged to tell.
14:33 Darwin neither knew the genes of a retina, nor the working of human language.
16:20 I second Franklin M. Harold, adding Human language and cosmic Geocentrism to it.
Friday, February 13, 2026
Wednesday, February 11, 2026
On Apologists and Our Duties
THE ISSUE WITH CATHOLIC INFLUENCERS - A Vlog
Amber Rose | 9 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkaSIP3BHFc
OK, holding controversial opinions, is that also a sin?*
I suppose Our Lord was pretty controversial twice over in the temple.
4:59 Some converts have to get into Apologetics instantly, as per school or family.
I was, when arriving at SSHL for ninth grade, a basically Evangelical Apoologist. When I left after twelfth grade, I was a Catholic one.
With some school mates, minutes of apologetics was the most peaceful interaction we had.
I was only received after leaving High School, since I graduated in 1987 and was received in 1988.
Now, this kind of thing can happen online. I think Sips with Serra and the Jewish Catholic are in this kind of position.
And in fact, well before the internet existed, a certain Chesterton who was already doing apologetics was received in, I think, 1922. Writing was his career, he couldn't just stop and he had to explain why he left the Anglican communion. In 1922, he denounced Eugenics, before Pope Pius XI did so in Casti connubii. In 1923, he wrote a booklet on St. Francis of Assisi, and in 1925 he wrote Everlasting Man.
Another case like that was a certain John Henry, future Cardinal, Newman. However, in his case, he was given the explicit order to write before getting instruction. One often forgets that Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine is what reflects the Anglican deciding to become Catholic, while that was fresh in his memory, not the Catholic case as it would be presented by a well instructed Catholic.
"I 5:38 mean, it does, but you're not like 5:40 authoritatively trying to speak on the 5:42 church. You know what I mean?"
The exact same thing is true about Apologetics.**
Trent Horn would be in a very great pickle if his pretence that Cardinal Baronius had said "the Bible doesn't teach us how the Heavens go" in the connection of the Galileo affair had been made authoritatively on behalf of the Church.
Cardinal Baronius had died before the Galileo affair, Galileo made the quote but didn't say what highly placed Church man, it's dubious if Galileo had even met Baronius, and I think the earliest person to pin it down to Baronius (a good apologist against Protestants and a holy disciple of St. Philip Neri) was in the 19th C. Perhaps the Anfossi affair.
[end] As you multiple times referenced "the Catechism", can I hope it's that of St. Pius X, or Baltimore?
Or the one of the Council of Trent?
* She mentioned rage bait is. ** They are also not speaking authoritatively.
Other possible criticism of me. I supposedly get my information from Social Media, which is getting clicks by feeding me what I believe. Basically what Ali-Marie Ingram is saying: |
Tuesday, February 10, 2026
Some Call It Christian Antisemitism
'The Jews Killed Jesus': Blood Libel or Biblical Truth? | Ep 1301
Allie Beth Stuckey | 9.II.2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUfXGtQoYuk
1:54 Sounds you agree with St. Ignatius of Loyola, "omnia in maiorem Dei gloriam".
Nice to see one Catholicism point here!
5:45 Could I amend "at the behest of the Jewish people" to "at the behest of a Jewish crowd, which decades later came to define the Jewish people" (and still doesn't define it in Heavenly Jerusalem, see certain verses Apoc 2 and 3)?
10:00 It can be noted, after a Christian boy was found killed around a Jewish passover, one of the Jews converted, became a monk and stated that this was a magic ritual to further a kind of proto-Zionist cause.
Ah, here it is, St. William of Norwich:
Thomas of Monmouth's account is attributed to the testimony of a monk and former Jew named Theobald of Cambridge. Theobald alleged that the murder was a human sacrifice and that the "ancient writings of his fathers" required the yearly killing of a Christian on Good Friday. This was allegedly for two reasons: to one day return to the Holy Land during the Messianic Age and to punish Jesus Christ for the religious persecution that the Jewish people continued to experience at the hands of his followers.
In this case, it may be noted there was no trial. However in this case there was:
The events themselves have been reconstructed from a careful study of the trial records by American historian Ronnie Hsia. Simon, almost two and a half years old, went missing about 5 p.m. on the evening of Thursday, 23 March 1475. The following day, Good Friday, Simon's father approached the prince-bishop to ask for help in finding his missing child. ...
You could of course agree with Ronnie Hsia, who probably considers the Jews innocent.
Or you could find this detail somewhat more decisive:
An examination of the corpse by city doctors determined that Simon had not died of natural causes but had been exsanguinated.
Basically, there are only two possibilities on this one. Either the Jews of Trent were very corrupt, or the Christian magistrate of Trent was very corrupt.
I guess it was the Jews of Trent who were so.
Nevertheless, when it comes to St. Andrew of Rinn, I think the uncle could have been the culprit, and if he wasn't, the persons who posed as Jews before the uncle could have been a witch cult with little to no connection with Judaism. Now, if the uncle was the culprit, Andrew is still a martyr, for his mother's chastity or perhaps even his own. As long as he was alive, the widowed mother could not get a dispensation to marry the uncle as per OT levirate laws. Didn't stop the uncle from lusting, though.
10:03 I'm not aware of any Medieval account saying red matzoth were a Passover meal.
On my guess of what Jews of this sort could have been doing (based on Theobald's view), the kidnapping of a Christian boy was eventually followed by sending out of either white or red matzoth, the latter with his blood.
White matzoth would have meant, the boy "agreed" (at c. age 3 and up, before puberty) to become a Jew, got circumcised, had his first Passover meal. Red matzoth would have meant "mission failed" ....
Remember a few things:
- Theobald mentioned the idea of punishing Christians;
- Christian apologists had made a point of Genesis 49:10, adding that the Messiah must have come before Jews lost the right to execute (in this context, confer John 8 and Acts 7 with John 18:31), sth which happened in AD 6 when Archelaus was deposed;
- so, Jews counted Christians above puberty as so sinful, that executing an adult or teen Christian wouldn't have targetted specifically Christianity.
10:12 What is your credible view of Sts Simon of Trent and William of Norwich?
These boys very certainly existed and were buried before reaching puberty.
I've already exonerated the Jews as to St. Andrew of Rinn, whose relics were recently removed from the village church, as if exoneration of Jews automatically meant he was no martyr.
10:33 I the 19th C, in Xanten, a boy was found, determined by doctors to be exsanguinated.
On 29 June 1891, Johann Hegemann, the five-year-old son of a local cabinet maker, was found dead in a neighbour's barn, with his throat cut from ear to ear.
10:45 Actually, Austro-Fascism was encouraging as, shall we say, propaganda against Orthodox Judaism, the idea that four killed boys in the area (I think they were all in the area), including Sts Simon and Andrew, were killed by Orthodox Jews because they were very strict.
The problem, apart from those in the case of St. Andrew of Rinn, is, things that every Jew did in the Middle Ages, and things that Orthodox Jews do now, coincide to a large degree. So, they may have been wrong in singling out Orthodox Jews, one could think of secular Zionists ...
11:27 St. Paul did mention the Jews killing Jesus:
For you, brethren, are become followers of the churches of God which are in Judea, in Christ Jesus: for you also have suffered the same things from your own countrymen, even as they have from the Jews Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men
[1 Thessalonians 2:14-15]
Now, to be very fair, he also mentioned his adressees being their countrymen, so, presumably ethnically Jewish.
But he's starting to use "the Jews" as it has been used through Christian history.
- Hope
- @MochiHopeful
- To me it reads just that he's stating the obvious—that they were Jewish rather than making a collective grouping or accusation. They went from only really being persecuted by Gentiles/Romans to now also being persecuted by their fellow Jews (Jewish people) around them, people like Paul.
Paul, called himself 'a Jew.' Nowadays though people use "THE Jews" almost like a slur.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @MochiHopeful I actually think the Jews were first among the persecutors.
My point is, at this point, the evil Jews are hijacking the Jewish name and St. Paul is already catching up on it. St. John took some more time, he first gives the heavenly pov in Apocalypse 2 and 3 and then the earthly one in his Gospel, resuming the previously diversely mentioned enemies of Jesus under the single label "Jews" ...
Meanwhile, many churches were still primarily Jewish or in the Holy Land Jewish and Samarian, but they were no longer referred to as Jews. Today those in the Holy Land would be called "Christian Palestinians" while back then it was probably "Nazoreans".
12:23 The Pharisees ... in the Synoptics, we consistently come across Jesus interacting with enemies like:
- the Pharisees
- the Sadducees
- the Scribes
- the Crowd.
In John, Jesus interacts with one category:
- the Jews
The reason being that by the time John wrote the Gospel, after the Apocalypse, so, c. 100 AD, the Pharisees had hijacked the Jewish nation, except for the part that was, along with a part of the Samaritan nation, simply "the Church" ...
John had in the Apocalypse reported that Jesus in Heaven doesn't count those enemies as Jews, now he's saying, "but here on earth, we can give them that title" ...
The Jewish Reason Jesus Waited 4 Days To Raise Lazarus
Krist Adams | 9 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa1dsCpI7aM
And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead
[Luke 16:31]
Not to the rich man's five brothers, but to his own two sisters was he raised.
Saturday, February 7, 2026
Friday, February 6, 2026
First Video by Heschmeyer I Actually Gave a Dislike: Let's Handle Sexual Morality vs Hypocrisy Better
Lots are splendid, but the things that aren't stand out like sore thumbs. So does the fact my comments were censored, cannot be interacted with, since disappeared from under the video.
Are Christians Just Sexual Hypocrites?
Shameless Popery | 6 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYM5w4wtiLo
1:59 I think there are occasions for throwing batteries in the Mediterranean.
Like, when you want a tracker to note where your ship is intercepted.
That's perhaps a good point if the interception, masked as an arrest is outside the arresting power's territorial waters. Making it an act of piracy.
3:12 If you say that a "homosexual is called to chastity" and don't add "like anyone else, and obviously including marital chastity, i e fertility and faithfulness" you are not setting a high bar, you are setting a wrong bar.
1) Because prior to Montini actual Popes have not set that as the bar (a document from 1568 concerns sodomites caught after already obliging themselves to celibacy, and they are obliged to celibacy ... and loneliness and shame ... because of that kind of vow).
2) Because to "Catholics" who believe that, calling someone homosexual, whether true or false, becomes a dog whistle for preventing him from marrying, therefore fulfilling a prophecy St. Paul gave St. Tim. I mean, such people may have sufficiently seared consciences to also prevent the same person from fasting.
4:51 The point of the 1568 document was, celibates should not have to live together with Sodomites.
And the point of things prior to Montini, celibacy is chosen. Including by persons who are feeling same sex attraction (but in that case they do well to stay out of seminaries and convents). It is not an obligation.
There are SSA people who are more allergic to OS than to celibacy. There are SSA people who are more allergic to celibacy than to opposite sex. And there are people who are not (or not very) SSA in the first place and who get squeezed because a sectarian of Montini believes a Priest of Apollo Delphicus (more usually shrink than tarot reader) that so and so is SSA.
8:13 That's not just too high for normalcy, but also too high for toying around with ideas like "that boy grew up without a father, ergo he's probably SSA" ...
Even in 1968, the number of boys this happened to by far surpasses the number of homosexual men today.
8:33 "single moms doing their best"
Which is sometimes very well indeed. I think my mother heard what you said from Heaven (in her case, I don't count Purgatory as realistic, she was a white martyr).
9:04 OK, you have shrinks speaking probabilities, like the Priests of Delphic Apollo they are.
With sodomy, you only bring up AIDS, which is a new problem.
Have you considered the punch line in St. Thomas' basis?
Sin against nature depopulates. And old generation of 5 million is likely to die pretty uncomfortably if all they gave life to under age 60 are just 1 million. Among Albigensians, this was not totally unheard of, btw.
A little tamer but closer to our reality, a girl the age I might like to marry one regretted the degradation of the "mentor" archetype. She brought up 1977's Obi Wan Kenobi (Alec Guiness, RIP or OPN, whichever) and compared to more recent films.
I made stats on this issue. That is, I compared US census stats from 1977 and 2025. The sections age 20 to 24 have gone down from 4.6 / 4.7 % of the population to 3.4 / 3.2 %. The mentor ages (above 60) have increased their portion, from 60 to 64, 2.0 / 2.3 % then and 3.1 / 3.1 % now, to 90 to 94, 0.1 / 0.1 % then, 0.2 / 0.4 % now.*
Supply and demand. A young person is less likely to want a mentor now. An old person is likelier to want someone to mentor now.
Some of the bad solutions involve pushing people into caring homes to avoid having them as mentors. And some of the bad solutions involve chasing non-young people one could also mentor. For instance, someone of age 57, whom some think of as 17 just because some network spread the rumour he grew up without a dad, and who has not succeeded, this man in this situation thinks I have had opportunity on opportunity wasted by people wanting, very improperly, to mentor me. My youth was misspent by people wanting to mentor me. Including a granny who couldn't, because she was atheist and my mother had made me a Christian.
9:30 Teen abortions would go away if teens could marry, but no one could abort, instead of many being able to abort (depending on state and moment of detection) but most teens not being able to marry.
In Sweden, teen abortions are a higher percentage of abortions than in France. Sweden also raised marital age or nuptial age for women to 18 way earlier than France, whose benighted president Chirac did so in 2006. 7 years nearly on the date before the legalisation of SS-"M" (just exchange the 3 and 4 from month to second digit of day).
10:03 Yes, there certainly are reasons to regret the passing of régimes like Benito's and Francisco's (mother made an essay on their patron saints, while in school) in which abortion was simply a crime, and could simply be punished.
Like 2 to 5 years, both for mother above 14 aborting with medical assistance and for the one providing such. Codice Rocco, 1930, Italy.
If the mother was under 14 or mentally deficient, she was legally not deemed to have decided the abortion, but someone else to have forced her. 6 to 12 years.
13:05 I don't like the comparison to drivers' licences.
Reminds me too much of how in some places doctors can deny people marriage licences, just as they can lock them up, on too loose grounds.
Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful, and by them that have known the truth
[1 Timothy 4:3]
16:58 Just in case someone wants to demonise my blogs as those of someone oversharing my faults, no, I'm not.
It's more likely that someone complaining of my "oversharing" is complaining of my sharing the story of their wrong doing (like people who take turns destroying my sleep some nights) or think of things as discrediting which I definitely do not find discrediting. If you drink beer with the food, do you think you should hide that from either your children or your audience? Me neither. You probably have Bavarian heritage, I was raised partly in Austria.
20:23 I definitely can't tell some drinker in Paris' streets I used to drink too much, because it didn't happen.
It was so far from happening that I'm not even fit to advise any drinker on how to stop.
You recall that Irish writer who said "na, I'm not a writer with a drinking problem, I'm a drinker with a writing problem" ... my own writing problem being so grave, it very much stifled me as a prospective drinker. I never got around to habitually getting drunk.
On healthy definitions, Bavarian and Austrian ones, not Arabic or Swedish ones.
21:43 "sexual sin or addiction"
Sorry, were you a Catholic or into the cult that a Christian Emperor rooted out from Delphi, again?
Addiction, if real, is a weakness, not a sin. However, a habit may or may not be from addiction.
If I had belonged to a religion saying "even a small quantity is forbidden" (which thank God I have not done), drinking a beer per day might be a sign of weakness, for instance the weakness of addiction. But belonging to the Catholic Church, I do not think it is sinful to get very slightly tipsy if that wasn't the main reason, I do not think it is sinful to get a heightened tolerance to alcohol, I do not think it's sinful to drink a pint of beer per day, and usually not get tipsy.
Therefore, doing so is not a sign a weakness, and addiction should not even be considered.
But some people read in their tea leaves that someone else is addicted, and some people read it in their own (false) religion and their inability to fathom the Catholic one. Let's briefly touch on cases where some might suspect addiction, like people smoking diverse not very legal things to sleep in the subway. Some of these are people who are being continuously sleep deprived and have a repeated need for some compensation, in my case usually coffee in morning hours and up to past noon. In the case of some others, they are being sleep deprived by people despising as "addiction" the habits they have of getting a douse lasting some hours.
* Mentor / Mentoree Dynamics Changing with Age Pyramid
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2025/08/mentor-mentoree-dynamics-changing-with.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)