Where's the one with donkey ears? Hee Haw!
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Isn't political humor wonderful (as long as you're not the 'cRAT')?
Where's the one with donkey ears? Hee Haw!
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Nobel Prize with Respect
Ma Zhaoxu, spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said at a news
briefing: "By giving a convicted person the Nobel Peace Prize, they show no respect for China's judicial system."
...Let's see: Nazi Germany: Carl von Ossietzky, South Africa: Albert Lutuli and Nelson Mandela, Myanmar: Suu Kyi, Soviet Union: Sakharov, Communist Poland: Lech Walesa, Iran: Shirin Ebadi. Argentina Militay Gov: Adolfo Esquivel
Well, should we respect China's legal system?
Read More
briefing: "By giving a convicted person the Nobel Peace Prize, they show no respect for China's judicial system."
...Let's see: Nazi Germany: Carl von Ossietzky, South Africa: Albert Lutuli and Nelson Mandela, Myanmar: Suu Kyi, Soviet Union: Sakharov, Communist Poland: Lech Walesa, Iran: Shirin Ebadi. Argentina Militay Gov: Adolfo Esquivel
Well, should we respect China's legal system?
Read More
Monday, October 11, 2010
What is free will?
Does this horse have free will?
Is free will a conditioned response – like if you see a McDonald’s commercial and suddenly crave a Big Mac? Or your daughter sees a toy and wants one. Is that the exercise of free will?
Is it a response to stimuli, like if someone says something to you or writes to you or slaps you on the face and you respond – was that response free will?
If you say ‘yes’ that’s kind of like saying, if I jump off a cliff I have the free will to hit the ground.
Is free will the choice to move away from a fire, or the choice to go to the toilet or to choose to eat when hungry or the choice to get out of bed when you are rested or not? Do these choices of action come under the heading of free will?
If you need to go to school or work and you would like to go naked but you choose to wear clothes – was that an act of free will? Or an act of self-preservation.
If you would really like to strangle someone or push them out of the airlock because they are so annoying – but you don’t. Is that an act of free will or self-preservation.
Where does natural reaction to stumli or acts that preserve your life and status end and free will begin?
What is free will?
Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum Joined at the Hip
In this age of terror threats you have the President and VP on stage together. How dumb is that. I really only say so because if anything happens we will have President Pelosi - and how scarey is that.
Now, on the other hand, after the election, if the Rebublicans take the House, these two twits can walk down the middle of the streets of Bagdad hand in hand for all I care.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Is there proof for evolution as a universal law or only a localized phenomena?
1. Carbon based life forms seem to exhibit the characteristics of evolution on earth.
2. Have these same qualities been tested and confirmed anywhere else?
3. Have life forms other than Earth carbon based been shown to exhibit these characteristics on earth or anywhere else?
4. Have any life forms other than Earth carbon based been discovered and tested?
5. What conditions would have to exist for such life forms to exist?
6. Is physical mass required for life?
If there were any other life form would we even recognize it as being a life form?
2. Have these same qualities been tested and confirmed anywhere else?
3. Have life forms other than Earth carbon based been shown to exhibit these characteristics on earth or anywhere else?
4. Have any life forms other than Earth carbon based been discovered and tested?
5. What conditions would have to exist for such life forms to exist?
6. Is physical mass required for life?
If there were any other life form would we even recognize it as being a life form?
Thursday, October 7, 2010
American Thinker October 8, 2010
Amanpour Inadvertently Exposes the Real Issue with Islam
William Sullivan
Recently, Christianne Amanpour hosted a panel discussion meant to explore the misunderstood delineation between moderate and extremist Islam.
A dichotomy is certainly brought to light in discussion, but considering Amanpour is a staunch Islamic apologist, it is probably not the one she meant to expose. She likely sought to support the notion that Islam is peaceful, and to advance the belief that only a small contingent of radicals corrupts the faith. To those ends, she enlisted guests of Christian and Muslim backgrounds for her panel, and I'm fairly certain she expected the Christian guests to attack Islam as an intolerant faith bent on universalizing Sharia, while her Muslim guests and audience members would defend themselves as peaceful practitioners of the tolerant faith of Islam.
Americans are familiar with the strategy. It's the standard stuff that tends to make Christians look intolerant and Muslims look misunderstood.
To Read the Full Article:
(www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/amanpour_inadvertently_exposes.html)
William Sullivan
Recently, Christianne Amanpour hosted a panel discussion meant to explore the misunderstood delineation between moderate and extremist Islam.
A dichotomy is certainly brought to light in discussion, but considering Amanpour is a staunch Islamic apologist, it is probably not the one she meant to expose. She likely sought to support the notion that Islam is peaceful, and to advance the belief that only a small contingent of radicals corrupts the faith. To those ends, she enlisted guests of Christian and Muslim backgrounds for her panel, and I'm fairly certain she expected the Christian guests to attack Islam as an intolerant faith bent on universalizing Sharia, while her Muslim guests and audience members would defend themselves as peaceful practitioners of the tolerant faith of Islam.
Americans are familiar with the strategy. It's the standard stuff that tends to make Christians look intolerant and Muslims look misunderstood.
To Read the Full Article:
(www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/amanpour_inadvertently_exposes.html)
My view on Nihilism:
nihilism: the refusal to believe in 'God'or a creator. The belief that there is no inherant purpose to life and that what ever is, is simply the result of ramdom sequences of events with no purpose or design attached to them.
In other words:
The 'big bang' was a chance happening that simply occured due to some unexplained random underlying phenomena taking place. All other sequential events occuring as a result of the initial explosion, were and are chance occurances with no rhyme nor reason attached to them other than the possibility of developing a more viable entity useful to the original organism's chances of survival. Though why and how evolutionary processes came into existance from that initial explosion and spewing of debris across the universe is unexplained other than to assume that the initial spark of life randomly figured out it needed to develop more attributes (one of which was to multiply itself) to insure its survival.
Humans have no purpose to their existance other than that which they give themselves as dirived from their own imagination and conceit on the value of said existance. Humans are, by nature, a construct whose appearance was for the sole purpose of giving monkeys a better chance at survival. Whether humans exist or go extinct makes no difference to the universe as a whole. Any rights, priviledges or responsibilities an individual, family, society or group of humans may feel they have or are owed are simply an extension of their individual or collective imagination and is directly related to their survival and enhancement as a successful product of ongoing universal processes. Nature does not give nor infer any rights on any human any more than it would on any other existance. Any belief in 'natural law' is simply a tool used by humanist, secular 'non-believers' to explain why anyone should be treated 'fairly' in a godless, inherently unfair and unforgiving universe.
The concept of 'natural law' is an idea useful for controlling mobs and ensuring the lifestyle comforts and safety of the alpha and beta (alpha wannabes) ruling class. A tool used by the alpha class to assist the general rabble in understanding their place in the universe and how to 'properly' climb the social ladder without ripping the throat out of the previous alphas as is done in every other species, including monkeys AND 'natural' man. Those in the alpha position hate change as it is a threat to them; thus the purpose of the philosophy of “Natural Law” is to prevent ‘unregulated’ and ‘illegal’ social change as much as possible. This product of human 'social' evolution, a 'civilized' view of natural law is, of course, only effective in areas of society where these restrictions are recognized by a subdued general population. There is the underlying fear that given the breakdown of civilization, this view of natural law, it actually being itself un-natural, will breakdown into its true 'natural' form - the survival of the breeders fittest for improving the general stock and ensuring the next level of evolution.
There is the possibility that humans may reach the point when they could artificially self-manage their own evolution. There are a myriad of possibilities in this concept all the way up to humans being able to manage the whole of the universe to their liking. This does not seem likely however simply based on the adage: shit happens. And nature, for the foreseeable future being in the driver’s seat, may come up with an evolutionary entity to protect itself from us: an ‘anti-human' rather like an anti-virus.
Two thoughts:
Heidegger views Nietzsche’s metaphysics as a perfection of nihilism.
Postmodernism in conjunction with television seem to make nihilism socially acceptable.
It is then quite understandable why modern western intellectuals cannot see beyond the rational logic of nihilism, and yet, due to some underlying calling within themselves, feel a need to find a greater 'metaphysical' purpose, goal or value out of what should be seen as infinitely more complex yet little more than the completely natural process of fruit fermenting into alcohol on a universal level.
In other words: no daddy, great protector and provider - you're on your own bubba. Keep your head down and your eyes open.
In other words:
The 'big bang' was a chance happening that simply occured due to some unexplained random underlying phenomena taking place. All other sequential events occuring as a result of the initial explosion, were and are chance occurances with no rhyme nor reason attached to them other than the possibility of developing a more viable entity useful to the original organism's chances of survival. Though why and how evolutionary processes came into existance from that initial explosion and spewing of debris across the universe is unexplained other than to assume that the initial spark of life randomly figured out it needed to develop more attributes (one of which was to multiply itself) to insure its survival.
Humans have no purpose to their existance other than that which they give themselves as dirived from their own imagination and conceit on the value of said existance. Humans are, by nature, a construct whose appearance was for the sole purpose of giving monkeys a better chance at survival. Whether humans exist or go extinct makes no difference to the universe as a whole. Any rights, priviledges or responsibilities an individual, family, society or group of humans may feel they have or are owed are simply an extension of their individual or collective imagination and is directly related to their survival and enhancement as a successful product of ongoing universal processes. Nature does not give nor infer any rights on any human any more than it would on any other existance. Any belief in 'natural law' is simply a tool used by humanist, secular 'non-believers' to explain why anyone should be treated 'fairly' in a godless, inherently unfair and unforgiving universe.
The concept of 'natural law' is an idea useful for controlling mobs and ensuring the lifestyle comforts and safety of the alpha and beta (alpha wannabes) ruling class. A tool used by the alpha class to assist the general rabble in understanding their place in the universe and how to 'properly' climb the social ladder without ripping the throat out of the previous alphas as is done in every other species, including monkeys AND 'natural' man. Those in the alpha position hate change as it is a threat to them; thus the purpose of the philosophy of “Natural Law” is to prevent ‘unregulated’ and ‘illegal’ social change as much as possible. This product of human 'social' evolution, a 'civilized' view of natural law is, of course, only effective in areas of society where these restrictions are recognized by a subdued general population. There is the underlying fear that given the breakdown of civilization, this view of natural law, it actually being itself un-natural, will breakdown into its true 'natural' form - the survival of the breeders fittest for improving the general stock and ensuring the next level of evolution.
There is the possibility that humans may reach the point when they could artificially self-manage their own evolution. There are a myriad of possibilities in this concept all the way up to humans being able to manage the whole of the universe to their liking. This does not seem likely however simply based on the adage: shit happens. And nature, for the foreseeable future being in the driver’s seat, may come up with an evolutionary entity to protect itself from us: an ‘anti-human' rather like an anti-virus.
Two thoughts:
Heidegger views Nietzsche’s metaphysics as a perfection of nihilism.
Postmodernism in conjunction with television seem to make nihilism socially acceptable.
It is then quite understandable why modern western intellectuals cannot see beyond the rational logic of nihilism, and yet, due to some underlying calling within themselves, feel a need to find a greater 'metaphysical' purpose, goal or value out of what should be seen as infinitely more complex yet little more than the completely natural process of fruit fermenting into alcohol on a universal level.
In other words: no daddy, great protector and provider - you're on your own bubba. Keep your head down and your eyes open.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)