>>11146505The better question is why he vehemently denies the axioms of group theory?
He believes groups generally tend to not have inverses. WHY THE SHIT?!?!?!?
What a cuck. Boama has said in his movies a few time, this is madness. When he slided down all through the room down onto the ground with his spear - did he care? The axioms are coherent if you move on to the covering space of the tent. This is age old technology. The party can rigorously deny that flights for prices up to $5000 should not be ecological. Nobody ever argued with that. When he with his friends takes over, we might as well all go to gulag. He didn't care about the suffering of others. He's the Putin of ecological dynamics - the gene doesn't know shit about what you really want, let alone the anthropoloigcal demands - no matter who's right in this debate. He circles around this weird argument, the Dawkenian prolema if you wish. This is irrational. We need to keep scientific, not genetic, in the end. The confirmation of the opponent, he'll quite likely ignore.
This makes me mad, it gets me all whirled up. Groups end up doing the right thing if they are left for their own. I can cite it.
