Sorry this took a while! :) LISTENER QUESTIONS ANSWERED!

1. Thanks. After the insults, you say I'm making things personal. Is asking a scientist what his null hypothesis is making things personal? You then make more appeals to consequentialism despite previously arguing you don't care what happens after slavery, it's immoral regardless

2. Then you say if UPB was self-contradictory, you would abandon it. But whether something is logical or not does not prove it is ethical. Finally, you say everyone you have talked to accepts UPB's premises. But not even your friend Mike Cernovich accepts it.

You don't have an ethics to abandon.

Excited to hear the insights, thanks for this!

I miss them classic debates back in day!