This year may be biblical

[fohat.digs]

Making sure that we keep our priorities straight.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/28/us/washington-firefighters-arrest-fighting-wildfire

[fohat.digs]

Commonwealth of Kentucky leading the charge, a legit state-issued license tag.

[tp4tissue]

Fohat,  you have to understand, the US is severely under-spending in its industrial base.

Our GDP is almost entirely fictitious, with little to no investment in production/mining/refinery activity.



Our population is also an unkempt mess, they are not only unruly, but stupid.   They will not be slaves, fine, but they also refuse to be engineers.


So here we are.  What's next for america. Realistically,  chances are if we do not enslave South America we're done for.  It is horrible, but IF our definition of growth is in the context of EMPIRES,    that's our only option.



The other path is, enter the chrysalis, and become the butterfly, EAT 100% VEGGIES.   FAT CHANCE that'll happen.

[tp4tissue]

This is where we are as a civilization!

" But increasingly, drug users say residents are using Narcan as a tool to force them off the sidewalks. In recent months, six homeless people told The Standard they have been awoken by a stranger misusing, or threatening to misuse, the medicine while instructing them to move.

“They’re using it like a weapon,” said Kenneth Byrd, who is homeless and addicted to fentanyl. “People are going around doing it just for kicks. "

“Using Narcan this way is not just mean spirited, it’s cruel,” Appa said. “When you send someone from a resting state to a heart rate of over 120, and say somebody has preexisting medical problems … it can be life-threatening.”

[tp4tissue]

Ya know, 

Tp4 were just driving to and fro dat Bestbuy today, play'n wit laptops, wasting alot of Gas, coming home stopped by a grocery store to pick up some Veggie nugz.

Realizing the whole time, humanity is doooooooomed.  Every person on the road this afternoon was driving their own 3000lb car, to some far away place they'd Rather not be. At the grocery store, the entirety of the shelf space is filled with junk, and is almost entirely MEAT=Cancer centric.


Then he gets home, some rich guy Tp4 knows, because welp, they're the only people Tp4 knows at this point being the errand guy. 

Their remark ??  OMG, Tp4 you were just saying the other day, how we should all ride the Bus and Take public transportation,  Insert video of that Ukrainian woman getting stabbed on the train.   YOU SEE Tp4,  YOU SEE,   look at these poor people,  that's what you want to do, you want to use the bus and ride on the train in America?  No thanks, I'll drive my twin turbo SUV thank you very much.  /Laughing Emoji


Doooooooooooooooooooooom!!!!!!!!!!


Firstly, people get stabbed and die from all sorts of reasons all the time, #1 and #2 cause of death is MOSTLY heart disease and cancer from eating MEAT.

But, the only reason we heard about this stabbing at all, is because it was a pretty white woman.  There's nothing remarkable about what happened here, and it's a significant minority within the Bus-Riding experience.

[TheSoulhunter]

#1 and #2 cause of death is MOSTLY heart disease and cancer from eating MEAT.

What else should it be? There always has to be a cause of death...

Back in the day people died from sepsis, starvation or murder before they got old enough to get cancer.
As people get older, rates of cancer, strokes or dementia raise. Not surprising, but to be expected.
We were not build to live 70 or 80 years. We already exceed our Best-Before-Date by decades.

[tp4tissue]

#1 and #2 cause of death is MOSTLY heart disease and cancer from eating MEAT.

What else should it be? There always has to be a cause of death...

Back in the day people died from sepsis, starvation or murder before they got old enough to get cancer.
As people get older, rates of cancer, strokes or dementia raise. Not surprising, but to be expected.
We were not build to live 70 or 80 years. We already exceed our Best-Before-Date by decades.

That is inaccurate.  When people quote the average age of death being 40 etc, from way back, that was due to extremely high infant mortality.  If you survived to adulthood, you live to 70-80 no problem.

And they didn't die of heart-disease, or cancer, it was mostly from communicable disease, or comorbidities+malnutrition.

Industrial animal agriculture, MEAT, is when heart disease/ cancer deaths exploded and became the norm..


The graph below shows when in WW2, the Nazis confiscated Norway's meat industry cows/sheeps/pigs for their army,

The rate of heart disease deaths dropped instantly and precipitously.  Then after the war, when the cows/sheeps/pigs were BACK on the menu, the heart disease rates climbed right back up.

[TheSoulhunter]

That is inaccurate.  When people quote the average age of death being 40 etc, from way back, that was due to extremely high infant mortality.

No! You are inaccurate...
The average live-expectancy for 99% of our existence was not 40 years, but more around 25 years...
I am well aware of infant-mortality-rates of old and ancient times. People who made it to adulthood, largely survived to age 40 or even 50, but not 80!

[tp4tissue]

That is inaccurate.  When people quote the average age of death being 40 etc, from way back, that was due to extremely high infant mortality.

No! You are inaccurate...
The average live-expectancy for 99% of our existence was not 40 years, but more around 25 years...
I am well aware of infant-mortality-rates of old and ancient times. People who made it to adulthood, largely survived to age 40 or even 50, but not 80!

You clearly don't even understand how those statistics work.

Tp4 said "if you reached adult hood" which is ~20, you can live to 70-80 no problem.  The average life expectancy excluding infant mortality for someone who REACHED 20yrs of age is around 60.   

There are tranches for this type of data.  Please educate yourself.

People may die for many reasons, but it was NOT due to heart disease/ cancer until animal agriculture became industrialized.

[TheSoulhunter]

That is inaccurate.  When people quote the average age of death being 40 etc, from way back, that was due to extremely high infant mortality.

No! You are inaccurate...
The average live-expectancy for 99% of our existence was not 40 years, but more around 25 years...
I am well aware of infant-mortality-rates of old and ancient times. People who made it to adulthood, largely survived to age 40 or even 50, but not 80!

You clearly don't even understand how those statistics work.

Tp4 said "if you reached adult hood" which is ~20, you can live to 70-80 no problem.  The average life expectancy excluding infant mortality for someone who REACHED 20yrs of age is around 60.   

There are tranches for this type of data.  Please educate yourself.

People may die for many reasons, but it was NOT due to heart disease/ cancer until animal agriculture became industrialized.

The majority of people who reached adulthood, died at age 40-50, for 99% of our existence.
Out of the people who reached adulthood, only very few reached age 60, and almost none 70 or more, for 99% of our existence.
The majority of people that die of cancer or heat disease today are above 60 years old. The reason we get cancer is that we no more die at 40-50.
If we would die at 40-50 years of age from sepsis, murder, starvation like for 99% of our existence, almost no one would die of cancer or heart-disease.

Or, as calculation...

Life expectancy in ancient times and before: 20-30 according to most sources, let's use 25
Child mortality in ancient times and before: 30-40% according to most sources, let's use 35

(65 * L) / 100 = 25
65 * L = 2500
L = 2500 / 65 ~= 38.5

So, less than 40 years of age till death for people who made it beyond 20.
Not 60 years as you wrote. Not 80 years which is the average now.
Thus we DO live decades longer than what we were made for.
My statement was correct...

[tp4tissue]

The reason we get cancer is that we no more die at 40-50.
If we would die at 40-50 years of age from sepsis, murder, starvation like for 99% of our existence, almost no one would die of cancer or heart-disease.

Now you involve heart disease inappropriately,  when you've been shown clear proof that the removal of high animal fats/dairy intake directly impacts heart disease deaths.

The only scientifically proven way to REVERSE heart disease, is eating a whole food plant based diet. Even statins don't work nearly as well, and they certainly don't unclog arteries.

You're categorically wrong, and you've misattributed everything you hear.

You can't just read the first reddit post that agrees with you.  That's a stupid habit of stupid people.

That's how the search Algorithm works, it finds the thing that FITS your narrative.

[TheSoulhunter]

That's how the search Algorithm works, it finds the thing that FITS your narrative.

What search algorithm are talking about? How about getting at my arguments step by step?

Was the average life-expectancy of people in stone-age and ancient times 20-30? Yes or No?
Was the child mortality during these times 30-40% Yes or No?

Did people who made it beyond 20 on average die at age 40-50? Yes or No?
Is that true for 99% of mankind's existence? Yes or No?

Does the vast majority of people that die from cancer or heart diseases die >60 years old? Yes or No?

Is the current average life expectancy in the western world decades above 40-50? Yes or No?
Did our body evolve to live 40-50 years as we do in nature, or to live 80 years as we do with thanks to modern technology?

You can extend your life by taking various measures like taking medications, a healthy diet and general prevention of health hazards.
However, we already extended our lifespan far beyond what we were made for by nature/evolution...

The cause for most deaths being by heart disease and cancer is not eating MEAT, it is getting extremely OLD.
If you remove MEAT from the diet, deaths by heart disease might go down, but deaths by cancer and dementia will go up.
If you don't die of one thing, you HAVE to die of another thing. People very rarely simply die of "old age" (heart/organ failure).

That's why I asked what else besides cancer and heart disease should be top causes of death.
If you want it be dementia, we would need to extend the life-span another decade, or two.
Most people already spend their last decade vegetating away in a elderly-home.
I don't think it's a good idea to extend this time to 2 or 3 decades...
Who want's that? How to finance this?

[tp4tissue]

That's how the search Algorithm works, it finds the thing that FITS your narrative.

What search algorithm are talking about? How about getting at my arguments step by step?

You have no argument.

No one even knows the life-expectancy across that MANKIND's EXISTENCE. They're wild guestimates, you can not then use it to justify any disease rate/ projected outcome.

You've called on what is an anecdote of pop media articles as if it were fact. This is your stupidity #1

Vast majority of people that die from cancer / heart disease at greater than 60, again, irrelevant, the root cause of atherosclerotic plaque can clearly be seen in children at earlier than 20 years of age.

quote: "However, we already extended our lifespan far beyond what we were made for by nature/evolution..."

You confuse the terms, lifespan and life expectancy.  Again, you have no idea what you're talking about, Stupidity #2

quote "If you want it be dementia, we would need to extend the life-span another decade, or two.
Most people already spend their last decade vegetating away in a elderly-home.
I don't think it's a good idea to extend this time to 2 or 3 decades...
Who want's that? How to finance this?"

You've cemented your ignorance here by assuming heart disease is inevitable, when it is not, and regardless if it's the cause of death, it's not a beneficial condition you'd want to keep under any circumstances.

Cancer is yet another disease you don't understand. Cancer became the leading cause of death AFTER its growth rate is sped up by modern diet with large amount of meat consumption. The higher hormone influx ontop of extra protein increases the cell division rate AND cell motility.

If the accelerant situation is removed, EVEN IF most people got cancer, the growth rate is slow enough such that they would NOT die from it, they would die from anything BUT cancer.

So again, You Have No Argument, You were exposed to pop-culture bro science, and you're too stupid to know the difference, and you're too lazy to do any research on your own.


Understand, you are what's known academically, as a "Functional Illiterate."  People at your low level of education can read a burger menu, but you are intellectually incapable or disinclined on finding out if what you've read is true.

Don't feel bad though, this is most people, Blue Maga, Red Maga, you are one.

[TheSoulhunter]

No one even knows the life-expectancy across that MANKIND's EXISTENCE. They're wild guestimates

So, you disagree with what is scientific consensus...
The cited numbers are not "wild guesstimates" but are based on:

- Aarchaeological evidence from about 500.000 skeletal remains. Error for a individual skeletal age-estimation +/- 5-10 years. Large sample-size averages it to near 0
- Paleodemographic Studies (studies of thousands of burial sites, with 100-500 skeletons per site) which suggest the same numbers as non burial site findings
- Comparative Anthropology (observations of "modern" hunter-gatherer societies) suggesting the same numbers

You can observe cross-cultural consistency as data from diverse ancient populations (Neolithic Europe, early Mesopotamia, etc.) show consistent patterns.

Feel free to link me any major publications stating something else...

You've called on what is an anecdote of pop media articles as if it were fact. This is your stupidity #1

Interesting... considering that I stopped consuming pop-media more than 20 years ago. What do you mean?
My information stems from studying evolutionary biology. Do you want me to cite books? Where does your information come from?

Vast majority of people that die from cancer / heart disease at greater than 60, again, irrelevant, the root cause of atherosclerotic plaque...

Your argument is irrelevant to the context of what I wrote...

Preventing that plaque, making you not die from an heart-attack at age 70, will mean you will die from something else, most likely cancer.
Thus, preventing the cause of heart-attacks, will raise the cancer-rate. And if you prevent cancer, it will raise the dementia-rate.
The only thing that changes is the life expectancy. And the life expectancy is, as said, already way beyond whats normal.
You might be able to raise it another 5 or 10 years by various measures. Sure... The question is if it's worth it.
Spending 20 years instead of 10 years in an elderly home, waiting for death, does not sound that appealing.
Why not accept nature instead of fighting it?

You confuse the terms, lifespan and life expectancy.

Let's see...

Life Expectancy: The average number of years a person is expected to live based on statistical data
Lifespan: The maximum potential duration of life for an individual - OR - The SPAN OF LIFE of an individual from birth to death

Thus, the total "Lifespan" of individuals of a large population results in the "Life Expectancy" of that population...

Instead of getting hung-up on semantics (without checking a dictionary it seems...) why not answer my questions?

...you're too stupid
...you're too lazy to do any research on your own
...you are what's known academically, as a "Functional Illiterate."
...your low level of education
...you are intellectually incapable or disinclined
...Blue Maga, Red Maga, you are one.

You not being able to have a discussion without throwing insults left and right makes it hard to take you seriously.
With that level of ad-hominem attacks you sound like a 10 year old having a temper tantrum...

If you actually want to get into a penis-length-compare of academic knowledge or intelligence...
Do you have an academic title? A Mensa IQ Test result? Noteworthy publications of any sort? Anything? :3

[tp4tissue]

You are not using cited numbers, you're just pulling them out of the air.

Even if you did cite numbers, as explained, credible data of this type are in tranches, you can not apply them randomly and out of context as you have.

You haven't made any arguments, your mouth moves, but you haven't actually said anything.

I've given you a good description for what you are,  you can choose to learn from it and improve, or as demonstrated, you have a compulsion to have the last word, even absent any content or consequence.

I can't help you there, that's a disability you'll just have to live with.

[fohat.digs]

With that level of ad-hominem attacks you sound like a 10 year old having a temper tantrum.

your mouth moves, but you haven't actually said anything.

Too bad there isn't a video of all this.

[tp4tissue]

Tp4 is text based. He can not yet do videos.


Soulhunter is a very typical netizen, his tactics are well known. If you talk to people of this type, you can not engage them on their claims, because they're baseless to begin with.

The only thing you can do is insert relevant information, then shift to ad hominem to keep him engaged.


He didn't come to discuss, he's got a mental illness for word-fights that he's happy with.

The only thing he can recognize are insults, and then he responds, he likes being insulted.  There is no interest from their end in the discussion at hand.

[TheSoulhunter]

Tp4 changed...



TP4 might need some adjustment >.>

[tp4tissue]

Tp4 changed...
TP4 might need some adjustment >.>

What were the options, look at your response rate, there wasn't a single thought behind your rambling, and you made no attempts to fact check, or incorporate points of view.

You came in here for a word fight, with no intention of discussion.

Tp4 provided you with what you were looking for,  assessed and turned up your stress lvl to maximum until you saw your broken self.

Tp4 is friend to all.

[TheSoulhunter]

Too bad there isn't a video of all this.

In difference to TP4, I am not limited to text...

[TheSoulhunter]

What were the options, look at your response rate, there wasn't a single thought behind your rambling, and you made no attempts to fact check, or incorporate points of view.
You came in here for a word fight, with no intention of discussion.
Tp4 provided you with what you were looking for,  assessed and turned up your stress lvl to maximum until you saw your broken self.
Tp4 is friend to all.

While I usually value your enthusiasm for verbal fireworks, you are swinging a bit hard with your claims. Your passion is outpacing your precision!
You say I am dodging a real discussion, yet I’m the one anchoring my points in data while you’re serving up insults and hot air...

Let’s get to the meat of it (pun intended)

My last post leaned on paleodemographic work, like Angel (1975), Acsadi & Nemeskeri (1970), Gurven & Kaplan (2007), Caspari & Lee (2004), and many many more, which peg pre-modern life expectancy at birth around 20-30 years. For adults who survived childhood, 40-50 years was typical, not the 60 or 70 like you’re tossing out without a shred of evidence! Where did you get your numbers?

The scientific consensus (ie. see the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Paleopathology) is clear... Humans didn’t evolve for routine century-long lifespans. That’s why cancer and heart disease spike past 60. Our bodies are running on borrowed time.

The natural mechanisms for tissue repair which are beneficial in youth increase cancer risk at older age, more and more the older you get, as shown by Weinstein & Ciszek in "Evolutionary Origins and Modern Implications of the Trade-Off Between Tumor-Suppression and Tissue-Repair". It is hard to impossible to escape cancer if you "dodge" other common causes of death, not matter what your diet is. You can't reverse aging!

Sure, some studies suggest plant-based diets could lower heart disease risk. Fair point. But you’re sidestepping the broader reality! Mortality’s a closed system. The Gompertz-Makeham law shows death rates climb exponentially with age, no matter how many radish smoothies you chug. Fix death by sepsis and starvation, heart disease comes up, fix heart disease as well and something else, like cancer or dementia, steps up to the plate. That was my point! That’s not "no thought" that’s just logic and math.

What I said is backed by publications of at least 5 Nobel laureates in Physiology / Medicine and dozens standard-works. What is the backup for your claims?

If you’re really a "friend to all" maybe dial back the personal jabs and bring some actual data to the table. I’m here for a discussion, not a shouting match. So, what’s it gonna be? Sources to back your claims, or just more hot air?

[tp4tissue]

"Humans didn’t evolve for routine century-long lifespans. That’s why cancer and heart disease spike past 60. Our bodies are running on borrowed time."


Ridiculous, botting doesn't make you smarter.  Especially if the bots are built on reddit posts.

You've merely regurgitated first 10 google results. Not only is it unconvincing, it's wrong.

Cancer and Heart-disease are not disease of age, they are diseases of lifestyle.   If you actually did research instead of botting your responses, you'd know that.


The shouting match, is necessary, because it exposes your failed conversational form.

This is not a real conversation with a real person.

[TheSoulhunter]

I didn't even need to use Google, I had the mentioned papers/books in the bibliography/references list of my own writings...
So, do you claim that all the people/works I mentioned are wrong? Or do you claim that they don't support my claims and thus I lie?

As for your “shouting match” exposing my “failed conversational" form...
I’m not sure yelling louder makes your case stronger. I’m here with citations, not pom-poms!

PS. Calling my points "botting" and "regurgitated Google results" doesn’t make them any less grounded. Actually I feel kinda flattered you think my research skills are robotic <3

[tp4tissue]

Dude, just give it up, your bot needs work.

Bots don't understand premise.  The whole nature of this conversation is unnatural.

[fohat.digs]

Actually I feel kinda flattered you think my research skills are robotic

If you had been around a few years ago, TP4 regularly referred to himself as a machine and was wishing that he was one.

[tp4tissue]

Actually I feel kinda flattered you think my research skills are robotic

If you had been around a few years ago, TP4 regularly referred to himself as a machine and was wishing that he was one.

Fohat, I understand you're old and look for any validation anywhere, but you're talking to a botter.

He made the mistake of uploading an essay that comes up almost entirely ai written, then when he realized he screwed up and no one responded, he started using an AI obfuscation tool.

The mistake is, now his text is 0% AI, which is also weird, because no one's writing is always 0% AI.

Bots and people who make bots are very stupid, because they've fallen for their own trap. They believe they're extremely creative and that making a little cash is moving forward.  But it's really the wrong application most of the time, and they're just wasting their life.

Tp4 recognized the bot instantly, because no one can respond to Tp4's context logically the way bots can.  Tp4 intentionally implants irrational logic corners in his writing that a human would simply fail to respond to.


Logic, distilled is like music, it' sounds good, and it is superficially attractive, but because it's not pinned to any life process, it's hollow and ultimately is only applicable in hedonic hijacking situations, which may bring short term gains to some individual, but a NET LOSS to the collective.

It's a waste of a life, and it is a pursuit of the narrow bound fool.

The bots are also currently not smart enough to recognize context and "stakes". So you can see the conversation flow is completely unnatural.


Please educated yourself,  as an old person, Tp4 is afraid Fohat is going to fall for one of those scams, and walk into an oncoming train because some big sister on facebook messenger wants to meet him. 

[tp4tissue]

A bot can make alot of corners,  humans either can not, or would not.  That's how you tell if you're talking to a bot.

Even then, it's not 100%, because you need alot of incursion.



The best you can hope for is, if there's any bot makers reading anything at all, he'd realize how much of a moron he is wasting his life.

That's the only context you can actually address.


Unfortunately at this point, because energy is so cheap,  if we're talking text based internet,  the bots have almost completely driven out humans.

This is partly responsible for many of Fohat's delusions about politics.

[TheSoulhunter]

Actually I feel kinda flattered you think my research skills are robotic

If you had been around a few years ago, TP4 regularly referred to himself as a machine and was wishing that he was one.

Wait... TP4 is not a "eccentric" AI created by tp4tissue as a pun?
It's actually the tp4tissue I know from 10 years ago?
Astonishing, and frightening, if true...

[TheSoulhunter]

He made the mistake of uploading an essay that comes up almost entirely ai written, then when he realized he screwed up and no one responded, he started using an AI obfuscation tool.
The mistake is, now his text is 0% AI, which is also weird, because no one's writing is always 0% AI.

Tell us which tools you used to determine this. So we can check if it's replicable.
You know, because of scientific method and so... :3

[fohat.digs]

no one's writing is always 0% AI.

Not sure what you are saying here. I don't use AI, never have, don't even know how. Don't want to know.

But if you are saying that I read something, somewhere, and it was absorbed into my consciousness - then yes - AI is probably distributed everywhere like microplastic particles.
 

[tp4tissue]

no one's writing is always 0% AI.

Not sure what you are saying here. I don't use AI, never have, don't even know how. Don't want to know.

But if you are saying that I read something, somewhere, and it was absorbed into my consciousness - then yes - AI is probably distributed everywhere like microplastic particles.
 

No old man,  AI detectors.

0% AI detection is equally as suspicious as 100% AI.  It's unlikely anyone doesn't at least write 1 or 2 sentences sometimes that would match how an AI would write them.

Especially if there's a sudden change of posts.

But outside of that, conversation flow and conversational stakes are also indicators.

[fohat.digs]

write 1 or 2 sentences sometimes that would match how an AI would write them.

Since AI "learns" by memorizing the entirety of the interwebs, then yes, the old maxim  "nothing new under the sun"  must apply.