Ego iustus volo ire domum.
Ego iustus volo ire domum.
It seems that math is incomprehensible to most Americans. It certainly is to the justice system.
To kill a murderer is just as much a murder as the killer's original crime.
So I guess the psychology/philosophy is that a despicable crime is healed and the human race is absolved by becoming the perpetrator of an equally despicable crime.
A logical fallacy, but then humans aren't known to be logical in mass; we become cowards instead.
Murder plus murder does not cancel out; it makes two acts or murder.
Oh, I have slid the surly bonds of earth and danced the din of crouching uncivilized hordes.
Down, down, with weeping scorched wings, I hear
The burning lies, the unnatural imprisoned screech of mindlessness.
Religionwar, the pain of a billion things you may soon hear of...
Freed from the unsanctified memetical fog,
I hear the quietness of a trillion things greater than myself, reach out my hand
and touch dimensions in a cosmos.
By Chris Hedges
He stated the truth in this post. It's worth a read, people....
The ocean is the origin of all life on earth. It's a single organism with a beating heart of thousand year intervals between beats and human civilization has exited for about 7 beats. Humans as a species has lived about 100 beats, mammalian life about 300,000 beats and all living organisms about 3 million beats. We are simply playing on the edge of a precipice that separates our form of life from other forms of the ocean's choosing. It can obliterate us in a matter of months when it "decides" it has had enough of our foolishness. When the time comes for the ocean to clean us out it will reverse the course of life on the planet as it has done several times already, starting the timer over as if we had never exited.
The ocean will not die by our hand but it graciously gives us a timed choice. We can join the rest of successful living organisms thriving and evolving, or we can continue on our suicide course of arrogance and complacency which will only lead to obliteration, a blip in earth's history unremembered. The ocean will die when the cosmos calls it's number and not before. So we join life or we ignore it.
Hate that is not countered by reason and an equal opposite force of retribution will win. This is the new world in which we live. It's been twisted into a sociopathic hate machine that has no regard for peace, love, responsibility, truth, reason, compassion or honor. It is steeped in contentiousness, complacence, and pin point self interest.
I refuse hate, I will not participate in hate. If I lose the battle because I choose ethics and justice, then so be it. Humankind is dying and I'd rather go down fighting for common unity among my species though reason and peace than to settle for scraps of hate for a moment.
Article title states "Neil Degrasse-Tyson Trolls Christians On Christmas.
The trolling is perpetrated by the writer of article.
The difference in dates between the Julian and Gregorian calendar is a
Straw man argument and basically ridiculous. He lived in England,
therefore his birthday is measured by the calendar used in England.
Even now there are calendars other than the Gregorian that are used by
different cultures. By their logic we all have different birthdays
depending on which culture's calendar is being used. I think not. If
he was in England, his birthday would be representative of where he was
from and he would have had no choice in what a monarch or theologian
forced their population use.
As far as accuracy, there is no calendar in use by any culture or
nation that accurately depicts the placement of the earth in space and
time in a form that we can hang on the refrigerator and know where in
that space and time we were born. It's all arbitrary.
Christmas or not, do we really need to try to undermine a scientist's credibility with common fallacy arguments that appeal to the unthinking? Whatever your religious or non-religious persuasion, don't you think we have undermined critical thinking enough? Articles like this are one of those slow creeping methods of promoting anti-intellectualism. It's one of those non-truths we complain about in politics that are there just to make a bad impression of the undeserving.
False arguments do not a "zinger" make.
Whoever used the word "troll" in this article is the troll.
Let us dispense with some conventional wisdom before it petrifies. First
of all, the president's basic unpopularity was unquestionably a factor,
but not anywhere near as much of a factor as was the reluctance of the
Democratic party -- from the president on down -- to embrace the actual
successes that the administration has achieved. The economy is, in fact,
improving. It is the responsibility of the president and his party that
we have the paradoxical polling that indicates that the elements of the
Affordable Care Act are popular, while "Obamacare" is not. (Mitch
McConnell told a transparent lie that Kentucky could get rid of the ACA
and still keep its very popular state exchange. He didn't suffer at all
for that.) The senatorial candidates who lost were senators who ran away
from the administration. Alison Lundergan Grimes wouldn't say if she'd
voted for the president. Kay Hagan endorsed the Keystone XL pipeline.
Michelle Nunn practically ran as an independent. How much worse could it
possibly have been for all of them had they stood by the president and
his record? How much worse could it possibly have been for them had the
president come to campaign for them?
Second, it was a great night for voter-suppression, which has been
central to the Republican response to the fact that the president has
been elected twice. Kris Kobach, the architect of the strategy, was
re-elected as Secretary of State in Kansas, and Jon Husted won the same
office in Ohio, over Democratic candidate Nina Turner, on an election
that was a referendum on Husted's voter-suppression tactics in that
state. Thom Tillis, who piloted North Carolina's incredibly stringent
voter-suppression law through the state legislature, is going to the
Senate, and Scott Walker, who oversaw the same kind of effort in
Wisconsin, is going back to his day job, running the state into the
ground and dodging subpoenas, until it's time for him to run for
president. It's going to take days to sort out the overall effect of
these laws on the general electorate, even if anyone cares to do so,
which I've come to doubt, because the Supreme Court created a new normal
when John Roberts gutted the Voting Rights Act and declared the day of
jubilee, and the people in the country who are not those inconvenienced
by these laws, and who are not those against whose franchise these laws
were directly aimed, seem perfectly content with this situation.
Last, and I hate to break this to Tom Brokaw, and to Kasie Hunt, who
talked about how the Republicans know they have to "govern," but this
election couldn't have been less of a repudiation of the Tea Party. As
the cable shows signed off last night, it was dawning even on the most
conventional pundits that the Republicans had not elected an escadrille
of Republican archangels to descend upon Capitol Hill. It was more like a
murder of angry crows. Joni Ernst is not a moderate. David Perdue is
not a moderate. Thom Tillis is not a moderate. Cory Gardner -- who
spiced up his victory by calling himself "the tip of the spear" -- is
not a moderate. Tom Cotton is not a moderate. And these were the people
who flipped the Senate to the Republicans. In the reliably Republican
states, Ben Sasse in Nebraska is not a moderate. James Lankford in
Oklahoma is not a moderate. He's a red-haired fanatic who believes that
welfare causes school shootings. Several of these people -- most
notably, Sasse and Ernst -- won Republican primaries specifically as Tea
Partiers, defeating establishment candidates. The Republicans did
not defeat the Tea Party. The Tea Party's ideas animated what happened
on Tuesday night. What the Republicans managed to do was to teach the
Tea Party to wear shoes, mind its language, and use the proper knife
while amputating the social safety net. They did nothing except send the
Tea Party to finishing school.
The problem is, it's not what the public associates themselves with or disassociates
with that counts, it's who's in control. If the people were in control of government as it is meant to be then the logic of these articles may have some meaning. But we aren't in control anymore. It's the power of money, organization and national/international business interests that are in control. Remember the cliché, "possession is 90% of the law". We the people possess nothing.
To hell with both major parties as organized entities that represent certain factions of the people as well as the non-parties, the new parties, whatever... we the people have to take back our country, and if we have to make a contract with the devil to do it, then that's what we do. The America we once knew or thought we knew doesn't exist anymore. Smoke and mirrors.
Associate with whatever entity has the possibility to grow strong enough, soon enough to take back what we have lost to those who have bought us, brainwashed us, and groomed us. Otherwise we'll just choke on that smoke and watch our reflection disappear in dreams of revolution that will never be.
The world is going to hell.
I should like to say two things, one intellectual and one moral. The intellectual thing I should want to say to them is this: When you are studying any matter, or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out. Never let yourself be diverted either by what you wish to believe, or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed, but look only, and solely, at what are the facts. That is the intellectual thing that I should wish to say.
The moral thing I should wish to say to them is very simple. I should say love is wise; hatred is foolish. In this world, which is getting more closely and closely interconnected, we have to learn to tolerate each other. We have to learn to put up with the fact that some people say things that we don't like. We can only live together in that way; if we are to live together and not die together, we must learn a kind of charity and a kind of tolerance which is absolutely vital to the continuation of human life on this planet.
"Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum
Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der
Abgrund auch in dich hinein."--Nietszche
One who battles monsters must take care that he does not himself
thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss
also gazes back into you.
Environmentalism has always been a game of chance, where the odds have always been stacked against any significant societal change ever occurring. The cultural impediments have never been anything other than stupefying; capitalism has been as immovable as our competing self-interests. And while resistance has never seemed like anything other than a losing battle, there was at least the perceived opportunity for a major sea change of consciousness to at least start to take root, or least “we” imagined there was still enough time for such a transformation to manifest. No matter how slim or distant that prospect has always been, the environmental movement of the last five decades could at least hold the high moral ground, as well as logically out debate any counter argument to maintaining the self-evident destructive trajectory of the status-quo.
However, while environmentalism has always been a game of chance, it has also always been a race against time. And not a race where we get to continually move the finish line as every new generation of vanguards is handed off the baton, but a race that mother nature eventually decides she is just tired of watching, or rather, the laws of thermodynamics eventually shift to a new equilibrium.
The major blind spot of environmentalism has been the moral imperative itself, for it has blinded us to the fact that humanity’s biological imperative has always superseded any subcultures concept of ethical behavior. In light of NTHE, only certain eastern religious branches and western nihilism can now in hindsight claim to have always known the greater “truth,” while we western radicals now find ourselves twisting in the wind at the end of a rope that was only ever attached to a castle in the sky.
It is not by accident that over the last fifty years, most environmental protest movements have been overwhelmingly generational youth movements as well, and in the same inverse vein, it is not by accident the adherents of NTHE are now overwhelmingly near or beyond retirement age. Relatively the same imperative and cultural obstacles still exist as they always have, the only difference is how long one has honestly lived with these cultural impediments; the number of years one has repeatedly banged their head against the epitaph of immovable human nature (growth). All that is eventually lost over the years is just our open-minded naivety and the illusion of human agency where there apparently never was any (i.e., the essence of hopium).
If you can take it.... this is what I have been saying for years... to and empty room.
If you not able to handle the truth, that's OK, because that part doesn't matter....
What does matter is that we still keep trying because if there is a small light in the heart of humankind it must shine for as long as possible. We really won't be here for many generations, but what time there is left, those of us few open-minded, naive humans with illusions of agency will defy the destroyers of our kind, exhaling to the last winds of life saying that we were, and could have been.
Thanks to GliderGuider at DU for this link.
"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.
Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.
It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."
-- Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot, 1994
"It matters what's true."
-- Neil deGrasse Tyson, 2014
(Thanks to Democratic Underground and Hissyspit for this post. It bore repeating and exposure.)
I suppose as long as we retain and participate in the memory of our loved ones they are immortal as far as we are concerned. Like the words of Epicurus... "Death does not concern us, because as long as we exist, death is not here. And when it does come, we no longer exist." So to think in terms of our consciousness being the "only and all" we can know and our memories being the substance of our past experience, it's not a far reach to see ourselves and others as eternal... at least for the moments that we live.
The moment Snowden and leaks come up in the news, what surfaces as the ultimate and most important question is "blame"; who/what is to blame?. That old and over exercised, redundant question will be answered one way or another but of what use is it? Does every issue begin and end with a legal box? I'm sure blame is the most entertaining and creates the most waves but is that all that matters? Why don't we start asking the question, "What is the smartest or stupidest move and who stands to gain or loose from it?".
Whether the man, the act or the spies are to blame is trite. Whether acts by either side in question have caused transparency or opacity is a really important point that could drive the politics. Whether putting lives in danger is worth unfettered transparency is a grave issue that needs answering. Whether the status quo is more important than a completely open box is another big issue. Where are the diplomatic lines going to be drawn where governments have to make decisions that effect the planet? Are they only valuable if there is complete transparency or is there some point where there is a closed door?
I believe this is a central fact we face: There will be no more concealable information in the world. We can encrypt to hell but information will flow. That is a huge lesson we have all learned from this. So, what are the rules of the game now? Fuck blame.
This is the definition of the United States of America circa 2014 without the hesitation of a doubt.
I find it hard to use the name "United States of America" for the country we now live in.
The founders of United States of America are no longer the founders of this country.
The people who have fought, bled and died for the United States of America did not do so for this country.
The people who have stood for freedom, human rights and civil liberties since the 18th century stood for a different country than we now have.
It may be time to change the name.
Or it may be time to take our country back from those who staged this slow rolling coup d'etat which has engulfed us.
The American Anschluß, and we just let them take it?
it is now Year 0, the first century of the Anthropocene.
Humans have had their negative influence on the earth in the last 5000 years for sure. Now there are more of us, we have advanced toys and we have less anonymity. But we still have the same reptilian survival needs turned greed, the same need to protect the clan turned nationalism, and a sense to sacrifice the weaker for the powerful turned politics. Those elements are not conducive to advancing humanity. I think we're devolving and we are now deep in that process. Whether that process can change directions or slow down all depends on our choices before our sociopathic side pulls us to the point of no return. In the end, there will be no end time, because the earth will always be the ultimate winner.
It's probably true in certain sense that we're actually living in one of the most peaceful times in global history. But I think that depends a lot on a person's definition of peaceful. Peaceful by what means? could make a difference in perspective. Peaceful for whom also makes a difference. Stable peace is different from peace at a point in time. What properties are present that make peace a permanent fixture rather than an period of exception. Time is a strange word when talking about human history and it's nonsensical when comparing it to global history where we are not even a blip. Perspectives are important to survival now that there is a reasoning animal on the planet.
The Council of Nicea – The Council that created Jesus Christ
The origin of the “Savior” – Later becoming the person worshipped today as Jesus Christ
What is Serapis? (Origin of JESUS CHRIST)
Ptolemy’s rule was to create a deity that would be worshipped by both
the Egyptians and the Greeks. He created “Serapis “, the made up
Graeco-Egyptian god that was invented in the 3rd century B.C., portrayed
as Greek in appearance, but with Egyptian accessories, representing
both wealth and resurrection.
“Egypt, which you commended to me my dearest Servianus, I have found
to be wholly fickle and inconsistent and continually wafted about by
every breath of fame. The worshippers of Serapis here are called
Christians and those who are devoted to the god Serapis (I find) call
themselves Bishops of Christ. Hadrian to Servianus 134 AD.”
Constantine and Arius
Constantine the Greek (a.k.a Constantine the Great) Roman Emperor
from 306 to 337, is known for being the first Roman emperor to be
converted to Christianity which strangely enough, Arius of Libya
(256-356 AD) born of African descent centuries after Ptolemy 1, had a
problem with the Roman empire teaching the Africans and the people of
Rome to worship a statue and celebrating death. He was considered a
heretic, a professed believer (of God), who maintains religious opinions
contrary to those accepted by his or her church (what the religious
authorities usually controlled by government deem as the truth). Because
he started attracting so many followers due to his teachings that were
contrary to the Romans, Constantine called the council by summoning all
the bishops to discredit Arius, The Council of Nicaea. During the time
when this meeting was called upon, there was no mention of Jesus Christ
at all; no man had ever existed by the name JESUS Christ, and an
important fact is that this all took place Anno Domino (AD) (which
Christians claim means after the death of Christ) but in Latin means ‘in
the year of the lord’. The name Jesus Christ didn’t exist before the
meeting was called (read the statements made during that timeframe). It
was only after this that they presented to the people the name JESUS
What Lord are they referring to? Kings have always been referred to as Lords or gods.
If Jesus Christ didn’t exist during the time this meeting took place
nor ever heard of whom are people worshipping today? Serapis Christus?
Nicean Creed – Jesus Christ is born
Nicean creed which became the statement of the Christian faith was
written decreed and sanctified by 318 Roman Catholic bishops at the
council in 325 AD (some believe this transformation took place “Council of Chalcedon” 451AD).
“We believe in one God the Father all-powerful of all things both
seen and unseen one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God the only begotten
from the father, that is from the substance of the father, god from god,
light from light, true god from true god, begotten not made,
consubstantial with the father, through whom all things came to be both
those in heaven and those in earth for us humans and for out salvation
he came down and became incarnate became human suffered and rose up on
the third day went up into the heavens is coming to judge the living and
the dead and in the holy spirit” (The origin of the Trinity)
The authorities shut Arius down and threatened him with death to keep
his mouth shut. They positioned the creed during the time when people
started becoming aware of the lies and deception, and ordered all books
to be burned; destroying all ancient writings, “no evidence no
argument”, and the outcome was the transformation from Serapis Christus,
which means Christ the Savior, to Jesus Christ by edict of Emperor
Constantine in 325 AD.
You can't look history in the eye... and not flinch.
I rarely share my general global opinion because I will admit the CT value of it is pretty far out there. I am very science oriented but there are issues concerning all the perplexing, contradictory decisions by the bureaucrats and ultra wealthy in the world that sometimes leads me to less scientific or reasonable conclusions. In a nutshell, sometimes I think the powers that be know exactly what is happening to the environment, the masses, the old systems of government and civilization in general and I think there is reason in the madness. They are basically hoarding and preparing to protect the ultra few, hunker down and wait out the catastrophe they and their ancestors have dug us all into. It would serve their multi-generational ego to be the sole survivors, the remnants of humankind. Whether their progeny will be able to stick it out that long is hard to say; I say not. But in the end, the earth wins and humankind will have been a very short lived virus that finally purged itself from existence.
That's about as dismal as I can get... but viewing our direction at the moment anything else is almost too pretty. But I'll fight for life. There's no room in my insignificant existence for a complacent party time end.
In this article:
..an Ex-con becomes an investor in a private prison for the purpose of exposing systematic rape by employees.
Here's a snip:
Now, Friedmann is attempting to use the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against both the company that imprisoned him, CCA, and the other largest for-profit prison company, the GEO Group. He purchased shares of stock in both companies, which allow him to attend the annual shareholder meetings and ask uncomfortable questions.
“I would ask questions like, ‘Why do your employees keep raping prisoners?’” Friedmann told VICE News. “Of course they don’t have a good response, other than ‘We’re doing the best job we can.’”
In 2010, he purchased $2,000 in CCA stock, which — according to SEC rules — allows him to submit shareholder resolutions at the annual meetings. CCA is the company in charge of the so-called “gladiator school” prison in Idaho, in which control of the prison was turned over to inmate gangs to save money on guards.
The first resolution he brought to the table was for the company to provide biannual reports on rapes that occurred in CCA-operated prisons.
“They really went haywire when I did that,” Friedmann said. “They didn’t like it.”
There is a time to be in people's faces and a time to go the subtle route. There are also times to be cautious. Wars and battles are not always won by overt actions. On the contrary, most things in life are accomplished by thoughtful decisions and respect of other people. I don't mean we should respect their beliefs necessarily, but to respect the persons themselves and be conscious of what they are able to grasp.
I put atheism in a category well removed from theism simply due to the fact that it's not a "thing" it's a condition. Religion is a "thing" not a condition. To elaborate... because religions have to create the idea they wish to think, it has to be defended and even promoted just to exist. Atheism doesn't need to be defended or promoted because you can't defend or promote a condition of being, it's just what you are.
As an atheist, I promote those things that advance humanity and life; those things do not require atheism but only require a human being. That being said, I would rather promote the causes and qualities that the atheistic condition frees me to understand than a belief that can't even support itself.
BTW, the word "atheist" is lower case.... because it's not a thing.
When faced with the reality that the world is now local and what was once local is now an entire planet, that fact can be a hard medicine to take. But we have to face the reality that it has changed and either we are able to see it and remould our lives and policies to the necessities that this change invokes or we prolong the process of stagnation, or maybe worse, we empower the destroyers and hoarders.
The American Dream is not a sacred emblem of worship, it was an idea that had it's time and under a better humanity it may have been able to last longer, but when that dream lost it's sense of the oneness of humankind, it slowly evolved to become each man for himself and with that came it's own demise.
The vices of humankind are deep in the root of our brain. Hunger and sex and the will to survive are very close to the drive of greed. It is no wonder to me that greed made it's way through the ranks of power to become the sum of all vice for the twentieth and twenty first century. If not checked we all have the greed drive working against us through the sensuality of survival, a corrupted form of survival. Sex sells whether the sale is logical or not. Hunger sells; we can be provoked to eat what we are given when there is nothing. Greed sells because it is the pretty shiny thing twinkling and compelling.
We need to break the bonds of greed and cultivate oneness in humankind again by discerning the difference between what is twinkle and what is real.
When someone really, really, really needs to have a belief system to survive,
yet their entire paradigm is butting against the facts, there's no doubt that denial, straw-men, dismissal, and blame will be their only salvation.
You can't expect a scientific approach to reason from a person who can't stop drinking the booze. The addiction isn't like physical addiction, it's their entire being/self/ego that's at stake. Until they can begin to break the habit or addiction to the sum of their fears and see that there is life (and death) after truth, they can't budge and must find a way out.
Look at it another way... If we who are now atheists were once steeped in religion and were able to come to the realization of our mortality and still find freedom from fear's lie, we were very lucky.