Like
Haha
Sad
Hug
Wow
Hmmm
Grrr/Dislike
Send SmileNavigation
Here’s my conundrum about Easter and Passover.
Gareth comments on Apr 7, 2020:
If everybody who finds a contradiction in Christian thinking starts a thread on it, we are going to be here for a very long time.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@dare2dream Not really!
Gareth comments on Apr 7, 2020:
If everybody who finds a contradiction in Christian thinking starts a thread on it, we are going to be here for a very long time.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@dare2dream Not really!
What is your opinion of private citizens owning firearms.
Geoffrey51 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I’ve no idea why a private citizen would want one unless they want to shoot something. Then you have to consider whether their subscription to the human race membership should be cancelled.
Then I’m not American.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@RoboGraham Typical remark by you, troll.
Geoffrey51 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I’ve no idea why a private citizen would want one unless they want to shoot something. Then you have to consider whether their subscription to the human race membership should be cancelled.
Then I’m not American.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@RoboGraham Typical remark by you, troll.
I 100% support Mr.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 3, 2020:
To vote blue no matter who is to surrender your influence to a corrupt establishment that does not care about you.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
YOUR influence? Hahaha. And what influence is THAT?
You're either a troll, a fool, or just plain lazy in the head.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 3, 2020:
To vote blue no matter who is to surrender your influence to a corrupt establishment that does not care about you.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
YOUR influence? Hahaha. And what influence is THAT?
You're either a troll, a fool, or just plain lazy in the head.
I 100% support Mr.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 6, 2020:
@Bobby9 What it tells me is my fellow liberals care more about charisma than issues, apparently.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 6, 2020:
@Bobby9 What it tells me is my fellow liberals care more about charisma than issues, apparently.
Why do you see very few Atheist conservatives?
Kadel comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Well conservatism in US is really connected to views on the social issues that are really hard to agree with for humanists (which most of atheists are). But I think many atheists, like myself, are libertarian which fits exactly what you describe (leaning left on social issues but right on economy ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 6, 2020:
@Kadel Libertarianism is anarchism with 'respectable' intellectual trappings.
It's social and economic darwinism.
Kadel comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Well conservatism in US is really connected to views on the social issues that are really hard to agree with for humanists (which most of atheists are). But I think many atheists, like myself, are libertarian which fits exactly what you describe (leaning left on social issues but right on economy ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 6, 2020:
@Kadel Libertarianism is anarchism with 'respectable' intellectual trappings.
It's social and economic darwinism.
The windows and dishes are dirty, please clean it for me bad boy!
Storm1752 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"You mean clean THEM for you, don't you?"
I look you over. Not bad.
"And if I do, do you promise to wash MINE when you come over to my place?"
I smile at your quizzical expression.
"Don't worry," I say, "I'm clean as a whistle. It's my mind which gets a little cluttered at times...that's why I ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@chiara23k I'm a journalist; it's a habit.
And, please, no physical pain... The emotional scars I suffer from prolonged isolation from womankind are almost too much to bear. Physical scars would be simply unusual and cruel.
I HAVE enjoyed spanking naughty little girls like you, though. Administered knowingly, such blows may elicit cries of pleasure rather than pain.
That's not to say correction is not also an objective, awakening under-stimulated nerve centers of a certain nature, thus restoring dormant sensations.
To the best of my recollection, that is.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"You mean clean THEM for you, don't you?"
I look you over. Not bad.
"And if I do, do you promise to wash MINE when you come over to my place?"
I smile at your quizzical expression.
"Don't worry," I say, "I'm clean as a whistle. It's my mind which gets a little cluttered at times...that's why I ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@chiara23k I'm a journalist; it's a habit.
And, please, no physical pain... The emotional scars I suffer from prolonged isolation from womankind are almost too much to bear. Physical scars would be simply unusual and cruel.
I HAVE enjoyed spanking naughty little girls like you, though. Administered knowingly, such blows may elicit cries of pleasure rather than pain.
That's not to say correction is not also an objective, awakening under-stimulated nerve centers of a certain nature, thus restoring dormant sensations.
To the best of my recollection, that is.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Bobby9 I expected nothing intelligent from you.
I wrote in the hopes others other than you would get something out of it.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Bobby9 I expected nothing intelligent from you.
I wrote in the hopes others other than you would get something out of it.
Why do you see very few Atheist conservatives?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Like what issues? The ones conservatives have co-opted and convinced everyone they invented (like the capitalist system, a balanced budget, etc.)?
Like it's probably better if abortions don't happen?
Like guns are useful in the right hands?
What exactly are these right-leaning issues?
I think ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Chickenwing We hat's so right-wing about that?
Your problem might be you listen to too much right-wing propaganda, which twists everything leftists think.
Except for abortion (which is the linchpin) most progressives run the gamut.
The key is:
Left = common action against super-rich elites
Right = lying to affect behavior of those who otherwise would act accordingly to their own self-interests, and against them
I'm pro-abortion myself, in that women have jurisdiction over their own bodies and have the right to kill a pre-sentient fetus if she so desires. It is not murder of a human being because a pre-sentient fetus is not a human being.
That's my own personal thought. Disagree at your pkeasure..
Storm1752 comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Like what issues? The ones conservatives have co-opted and convinced everyone they invented (like the capitalist system, a balanced budget, etc.)?
Like it's probably better if abortions don't happen?
Like guns are useful in the right hands?
What exactly are these right-leaning issues?
I think ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Chickenwing We hat's so right-wing about that?
Your problem might be you listen to too much right-wing propaganda, which twists everything leftists think.
Except for abortion (which is the linchpin) most progressives run the gamut.
The key is:
Left = common action against super-rich elites
Right = lying to affect behavior of those who otherwise would act accordingly to their own self-interests, and against them
I'm pro-abortion myself, in that women have jurisdiction over their own bodies and have the right to kill a pre-sentient fetus if she so desires. It is not murder of a human being because a pre-sentient fetus is not a human being.
That's my own personal thought. Disagree at your pkeasure..
Why do you see very few Atheist conservatives?
Kadel comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Well conservatism in US is really connected to views on the social issues that are really hard to agree with for humanists (which most of atheists are). But I think many atheists, like myself, are libertarian which fits exactly what you describe (leaning left on social issues but right on economy ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
Libertarianism is another word for Anarchy.
Or Social and Economic Darwinism.
Are you SURE you would survive and prosper in such a system?
For your sake I hope so, because if you and your fellow Republicans have your way, that's where we're heading!
Libertarianism is the exact opposite of socialism. There is very little if any common ground. Both are doomed to failure because supermen and inferior yet ravenous subhumans are in very short supply and such rigors, and grovelings, are beyond the abilities and/or inclinations of average men.
Unless you want to glorify the strong and euthanize the weak... THERE'S an idea libertarians can endorse!
Kadel comments on Apr 5, 2020:
Well conservatism in US is really connected to views on the social issues that are really hard to agree with for humanists (which most of atheists are). But I think many atheists, like myself, are libertarian which fits exactly what you describe (leaning left on social issues but right on economy ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
Libertarianism is another word for Anarchy.
Or Social and Economic Darwinism.
Are you SURE you would survive and prosper in such a system?
For your sake I hope so, because if you and your fellow Republicans have your way, that's where we're heading!
Libertarianism is the exact opposite of socialism. There is very little if any common ground. Both are doomed to failure because supermen and inferior yet ravenous subhumans are in very short supply and such rigors, and grovelings, are beyond the abilities and/or inclinations of average men.
Unless you want to glorify the strong and euthanize the weak... THERE'S an idea libertarians can endorse!
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Bobby9 It will happen. It's inevitable, and a very good thing. Sorry you don't see that. We may see part of it unfold, but it won't be a revolution...one day we'll (or people of a future time) will wake up and there it will be. Like one day our ancestors woke, and there was democracy. Or WE woke up, and we had computers in our phones. Just a natural progression.
So many people on here are convinced chances of our survival are 50-50. Maybe you're one of them. The real odds might be much worse.
So unconditional cooperation may be our only hope. And that's a main reason it'll happen.
Another good reason is the world's population will reach 20 billion by 2030, so we can either deal with this sobering fact by either bringing it under control, or by becoming super-efficient, or by watching millions upon billions die horrible deaths. Our choice.
The environment is bring destroyed. Similarly, we can either deal with it in a coordinated fashion, or watch it collapse. You guessed it: unconditional, coordinated cooperation is the only way to bring CO2 emissions under control. The tools are there, the coordination is not.
War is the other, perhaps greatest threat. Again, the ONLY way to eliminate it is at least the semblance of an international system of cooperation, rather than confrontation. Peace is not a matter of choice, in the final analysis, but a mandatory precondition for our survival.
The Republicans represent an 'evil' ideology of confrontation and dominance. You may disagree with me, you sound like one yourself, because you apparently believe the current world order is satisfactory and if anything should be strengthened and reinforced.
That's what many in the Eastern Roman Empire thought in the 400s just before they finally fell. Nothing lasts forever, nor should it. There was nothing 'noble' or invincible about a parasitic dictatorial system based on conquest and slavery.
And the USA will eventually have to lead the birth of a new world order, or be consumed by it. The current parasitic financial system birthed after WWII, wherein the American dollar is the world"s reserve currency, is artificial and exploitative; already it's being challenged and cannot remain in place forever. Not should it. (Concurrently, we cannot absorb trillion-dollars deficits forever. There WILL be a day of reckoning. Count on it.)
Anyway, multiply our domestic problems by over 130 separate, independently-run countries, and the problems begin to look insurmountable.
Look at it this way: there used to be such a thing as 'city-states,' a rather quaint feudal arrangement whose time came and went. They no longer exist today (except Monaco and the Vatican and a few other oddballs), because the trend has always been toward larger, more complex systems, WITH DIVERSITY BUILT INTO ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 5, 2020:
@Bobby9 It will happen. It's inevitable, and a very good thing. Sorry you don't see that. We may see part of it unfold, but it won't be a revolution...one day we'll (or people of a future time) will wake up and there it will be. Like one day our ancestors woke, and there was democracy. Or WE woke up, and we had computers in our phones. Just a natural progression.
So many people on here are convinced chances of our survival are 50-50. Maybe you're one of them. The real odds might be much worse.
So unconditional cooperation may be our only hope. And that's a main reason it'll happen.
Another good reason is the world's population will reach 20 billion by 2030, so we can either deal with this sobering fact by either bringing it under control, or by becoming super-efficient, or by watching millions upon billions die horrible deaths. Our choice.
The environment is bring destroyed. Similarly, we can either deal with it in a coordinated fashion, or watch it collapse. You guessed it: unconditional, coordinated cooperation is the only way to bring CO2 emissions under control. The tools are there, the coordination is not.
War is the other, perhaps greatest threat. Again, the ONLY way to eliminate it is at least the semblance of an international system of cooperation, rather than confrontation. Peace is not a matter of choice, in the final analysis, but a mandatory precondition for our survival.
The Republicans represent an 'evil' ideology of confrontation and dominance. You may disagree with me, you sound like one yourself, because you apparently believe the current world order is satisfactory and if anything should be strengthened and reinforced.
That's what many in the Eastern Roman Empire thought in the 400s just before they finally fell. Nothing lasts forever, nor should it. There was nothing 'noble' or invincible about a parasitic dictatorial system based on conquest and slavery.
And the USA will eventually have to lead the birth of a new world order, or be consumed by it. The current parasitic financial system birthed after WWII, wherein the American dollar is the world"s reserve currency, is artificial and exploitative; already it's being challenged and cannot remain in place forever. Not should it. (Concurrently, we cannot absorb trillion-dollars deficits forever. There WILL be a day of reckoning. Count on it.)
Anyway, multiply our domestic problems by over 130 separate, independently-run countries, and the problems begin to look insurmountable.
Look at it this way: there used to be such a thing as 'city-states,' a rather quaint feudal arrangement whose time came and went. They no longer exist today (except Monaco and the Vatican and a few other oddballs), because the trend has always been toward larger, more complex systems, WITH DIVERSITY BUILT INTO ...
Isn't it strange how all these recent mega-disasters, like the Great Depression, the Korean and ...
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 4, 2020:
The Korean War began under Truman. The Vietnam War, Kennedy and Johnson. The World Wars were out of our control until we jumped in.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
France left Indochina in 1954, and Eisenhower ordered continued support for south Vietnamese. He then dumped it in the lap of Kennedy, who might've been (but probably wasn't) assassinated for wanting to get us out
I wanted to expunge Korea but couldn't figure out how.
Woodrow Wilson TRIED to keep us out of WWI, but Germany kept sinking American ships.
We all know about WWII.
It seems to me Democrats are more peaceful, conciliatory and collaborative; Republicans more belligerant and confrontational. That was my point.
I think a legitimate one.
That must lead to other connections but forgive me if my brain's a little fatigued at the moment.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 4, 2020:
The Korean War began under Truman. The Vietnam War, Kennedy and Johnson. The World Wars were out of our control until we jumped in.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
France left Indochina in 1954, and Eisenhower ordered continued support for south Vietnamese. He then dumped it in the lap of Kennedy, who might've been (but probably wasn't) assassinated for wanting to get us out
I wanted to expunge Korea but couldn't figure out how.
Woodrow Wilson TRIED to keep us out of WWI, but Germany kept sinking American ships.
We all know about WWII.
It seems to me Democrats are more peaceful, conciliatory and collaborative; Republicans more belligerant and confrontational. That was my point.
I think a legitimate one.
That must lead to other connections but forgive me if my brain's a little fatigued at the moment.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9, @SanDiegoAirport It's just a symbol. It doesn't DO anything.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9, @SanDiegoAirport It's just a symbol. It doesn't DO anything.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 NOW it's a pipe dream, of course. I said it'll be a gradual evolution in human attitudes and makeup, not something which would happen overnight.
The constant wars and other disastrous developments you mention would have to intensify to a crisis point, a tipping point, from which time things would either gradually improve or first there would have to be another world war. Either way, or in some other way, a world government is inevitable, in my opinion, given the advancements in technology. In part, it seems to already be happening. But it won't come to fruition in out lifetimes, most likely.
On the other hand, who knows? Things are happening so fast it's hard to tell.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 NOW it's a pipe dream, of course. I said it'll be a gradual evolution in human attitudes and makeup, not something which would happen overnight.
The constant wars and other disastrous developments you mention would have to intensify to a crisis point, a tipping point, from which time things would either gradually improve or first there would have to be another world war. Either way, or in some other way, a world government is inevitable, in my opinion, given the advancements in technology. In part, it seems to already be happening. But it won't come to fruition in out lifetimes, most likely.
On the other hand, who knows? Things are happening so fast it's hard to tell.
Is Christianity worse than nihilism?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think Christianity and Atheism are both nihilistic, but more obviously atheism.
I dislike both, more so Christianity, because it disguises it's nihilism behind an Armaggedon-ish veil: THIS world will be destroyed, and from the ashes will be born a new world. Thanks a lot.
Atheism is more ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Techpriest Of course.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think Christianity and Atheism are both nihilistic, but more obviously atheism.
I dislike both, more so Christianity, because it disguises it's nihilism behind an Armaggedon-ish veil: THIS world will be destroyed, and from the ashes will be born a new world. Thanks a lot.
Atheism is more ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Techpriest Of course.
I can't lie this lockdown isolation is tough.
Paracosm comments on Apr 4, 2020:
It should be considered extra stupid. Find someone to video chat or watch porn.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Porn is replacing actual human interaction anyway...
Paracosm comments on Apr 4, 2020:
It should be considered extra stupid. Find someone to video chat or watch porn.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Porn is replacing actual human interaction anyway...
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 It depends on what KIND of government it is, of course. And what if there's a fascist overthrow?
So there's tremendous risk. It'll take a gradual evolution of human attitudes and makeup, and the world will go through countless upheavals before anything like it takes place. I'm not saying it will be quick and easy.
That said, the benefits are obvious:
*No or MUCH less war, freeing resources for more constructive purposes
*Greater and more efficient location of resources, so less starvation and poverty.
*Greater understanding and cooperation among peoples.
*A more unified approach to global problems.
*Perhaps a science-based spirituality replacing superstition-based religion.
"The refutation of religious doomsday prophecies, with a paridigm shift to looking constructively forward to future events with optimism rather than foreboding.
*Elimination or amelioration of dangerous trends and conditions, such as nuclear stockpiles, environmental degradation, and other destructive competitions which threaten human extinction.
Risking your scorn and derision, I'm talking about the ushering in of an earthly Utopia. We are quickly developing the technology to make that feasible.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 It depends on what KIND of government it is, of course. And what if there's a fascist overthrow?
So there's tremendous risk. It'll take a gradual evolution of human attitudes and makeup, and the world will go through countless upheavals before anything like it takes place. I'm not saying it will be quick and easy.
That said, the benefits are obvious:
*No or MUCH less war, freeing resources for more constructive purposes
*Greater and more efficient location of resources, so less starvation and poverty.
*Greater understanding and cooperation among peoples.
*A more unified approach to global problems.
*Perhaps a science-based spirituality replacing superstition-based religion.
"The refutation of religious doomsday prophecies, with a paridigm shift to looking constructively forward to future events with optimism rather than foreboding.
*Elimination or amelioration of dangerous trends and conditions, such as nuclear stockpiles, environmental degradation, and other destructive competitions which threaten human extinction.
Risking your scorn and derision, I'm talking about the ushering in of an earthly Utopia. We are quickly developing the technology to make that feasible.
I 100% support Mr.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@racocn8 Okay, then you have that right.
I just think it's ridiculous and very bad form for Bernie supporters to condemn other Dem candidates, accusing them of all kinds of nefarious machinations, putting them in the same category as Pub candidates, because he's losing.
What planet are they from? Do they seriously think there's little or no difference between the two groups?
That they also are in the pocket of evil corporate interests and lust only after power?
Don't they understand NOT taking corporate money is tantamount to unilateral disarmament and surrender? That just because they take the contributions doesn't mean they are beholden to them?
All of these corporations give to both parties to ensure they have SOME access should their preferred party not win. But that doesn't mean they give equally with equal enthusiasm.
The Dems are by far the underdog.
Bernie is an outlier. He takes individual donations only, much like Ralph Nader did when he ruined Gore's candidacy. Just like he did in 2016 when he ruined Hillary's (in much less dramatic fashion).
That's great. Good for him. I voted for him and if he's the Dem candidate I will again.
But if he isn't, I'll vote for whoever is and hope like heck he or she wins.
If some fellow liberals and progressives don't, and the Donald and his crappy party wins again, they'll be to blame, and I hope they're happy and proud of themselves.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@racocn8 Okay, then you have that right.
I just think it's ridiculous and very bad form for Bernie supporters to condemn other Dem candidates, accusing them of all kinds of nefarious machinations, putting them in the same category as Pub candidates, because he's losing.
What planet are they from? Do they seriously think there's little or no difference between the two groups?
That they also are in the pocket of evil corporate interests and lust only after power?
Don't they understand NOT taking corporate money is tantamount to unilateral disarmament and surrender? That just because they take the contributions doesn't mean they are beholden to them?
All of these corporations give to both parties to ensure they have SOME access should their preferred party not win. But that doesn't mean they give equally with equal enthusiasm.
The Dems are by far the underdog.
Bernie is an outlier. He takes individual donations only, much like Ralph Nader did when he ruined Gore's candidacy. Just like he did in 2016 when he ruined Hillary's (in much less dramatic fashion).
That's great. Good for him. I voted for him and if he's the Dem candidate I will again.
But if he isn't, I'll vote for whoever is and hope like heck he or she wins.
If some fellow liberals and progressives don't, and the Donald and his crappy party wins again, they'll be to blame, and I hope they're happy and proud of themselves.
I 100% support Mr.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@racocn8 Good. Then don't complain about Trump. He's in there because you didn't like Hillary, who would've been light years better than him.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
You're an idiot.
Forgive me for saying that. I don't know what came over me.
But think what an infinitely better world it would be if:
Al Gore won in 2000.
Kerry had won in 2004.
Hillary had won in 2016.
(Add to that if Dems had controlled both houses of Congress those years.)
WHY didn't they...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@racocn8 Good. Then don't complain about Trump. He's in there because you didn't like Hillary, who would've been light years better than him.
I 100% support Mr.
Sticks48 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
He is not being cheated, and yes you vote blue no matter who. If you don't you are too stupid to live. It is that simple.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you.
Sticks48 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
He is not being cheated, and yes you vote blue no matter who. If you don't you are too stupid to live. It is that simple.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you.
I 100% support Mr.
MarkiusMahamius comments on Apr 3, 2020:
Theres a Bernie Bot group, I think. At least one.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@RoboGraham YOU need a bot group, troll.
MarkiusMahamius comments on Apr 3, 2020:
Theres a Bernie Bot group, I think. At least one.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@RoboGraham YOU need a bot group, troll.
I 100% support Mr.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 3, 2020:
To vote blue no matter who is to surrender your influence to a corrupt establishment that does not care about you.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you troll.
More like, we can't win if we don't vote.
I think we win this time.
And not because of 'purist perfectionists' like you.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 3, 2020:
To vote blue no matter who is to surrender your influence to a corrupt establishment that does not care about you.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you troll.
More like, we can't win if we don't vote.
I think we win this time.
And not because of 'purist perfectionists' like you.
I 100% support Mr.
Varn comments on Apr 3, 2020:
Well, ya got one thing right - ***That’s Bullshit*** But if you and Bern were so ..bright, why’d ya try running in such a ‘corrupt party’ to begin with? Why not dive into that ***Party of Political Purists*** and run as a **Republican..?**
Pretty weak not to have the intellectual ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Totally agree.
I think some of these Bernie or Bust people must be trolls. Democracy means taking into consideration, and respecting, the retards who don't see Bernie as the Old Gray Semitic Savior, and means getting someone in there who'll not cause an instinctive gag reflex and automatic Trump vote.
You and I know better, but a lot of morons don't see things our way and will crucify us if we nominate a truly enlightened person like Sanders.
(P.S. I now think Biden has become borderline senile, but too late to choose someone else.)
Varn comments on Apr 3, 2020:
Well, ya got one thing right - ***That’s Bullshit*** But if you and Bern were so ..bright, why’d ya try running in such a ‘corrupt party’ to begin with? Why not dive into that ***Party of Political Purists*** and run as a **Republican..?**
Pretty weak not to have the intellectual ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Totally agree.
I think some of these Bernie or Bust people must be trolls. Democracy means taking into consideration, and respecting, the retards who don't see Bernie as the Old Gray Semitic Savior, and means getting someone in there who'll not cause an instinctive gag reflex and automatic Trump vote.
You and I know better, but a lot of morons don't see things our way and will crucify us if we nominate a truly enlightened person like Sanders.
(P.S. I now think Biden has become borderline senile, but too late to choose someone else.)
The older I get the more convinced I become that the insanity in the human race is the norm rather ...
AmyTheBruce comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I'm in a cheerful mood right now, so please allow me to (hopefully) soothe you a bit.
We are not insane so much as we are the lovely products of evolution. And look how far we've come!
Sure, we entertain some irrational thoughts - there are glitches in the process! But isn't that lovely, ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you. I get so tired of the steady, monotonous, boring drumbeat of negativity espoused by some our fellow travelers.
Much of the reason I slipped quietly and snugly into agnosticism a long time ago was because it was tremendously liberating. I felt a tremendous weight lifting as I realized I was free of the old negativity and worries...only to be exposed on here to a different but no less onerous negativity by often atheistic doom-and-gloomers.
There is so many interesting things to talk about and explore--always keeping in mind and duly noting the reactionary forces but not becoming ones ourselves! We are on the cusp of some fairly 'magical' advances made possible by our endless ingenuity, ones which will make what we have accomplished so far look like stone-age clubs and cave dwellings. I'm convinced developing technologies will render obsolete today's problems, while creating new ones far easier to deal with and overcome, to the point some day we will look around and discover paradise on Earth has been achieved.
Sure, that's being ridiculously and naively optimistic, but so what? We all have to think about something, and I for one would rather think about that--which my agnosticism allows me to do--than go on and on about the hated and dastardly Republicans (which I do also when in a really bad mood) or the certain destruction of the environment, or the coming, creeping capitalist oligarchy!
Those are real problems, to be sure, but can we please every now and then look on the bright side, for chrissake?
Thank you.
AmyTheBruce comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I'm in a cheerful mood right now, so please allow me to (hopefully) soothe you a bit.
We are not insane so much as we are the lovely products of evolution. And look how far we've come!
Sure, we entertain some irrational thoughts - there are glitches in the process! But isn't that lovely, ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Thank you. I get so tired of the steady, monotonous, boring drumbeat of negativity espoused by some our fellow travelers.
Much of the reason I slipped quietly and snugly into agnosticism a long time ago was because it was tremendously liberating. I felt a tremendous weight lifting as I realized I was free of the old negativity and worries...only to be exposed on here to a different but no less onerous negativity by often atheistic doom-and-gloomers.
There is so many interesting things to talk about and explore--always keeping in mind and duly noting the reactionary forces but not becoming ones ourselves! We are on the cusp of some fairly 'magical' advances made possible by our endless ingenuity, ones which will make what we have accomplished so far look like stone-age clubs and cave dwellings. I'm convinced developing technologies will render obsolete today's problems, while creating new ones far easier to deal with and overcome, to the point some day we will look around and discover paradise on Earth has been achieved.
Sure, that's being ridiculously and naively optimistic, but so what? We all have to think about something, and I for one would rather think about that--which my agnosticism allows me to do--than go on and on about the hated and dastardly Republicans (which I do also when in a really bad mood) or the certain destruction of the environment, or the coming, creeping capitalist oligarchy!
Those are real problems, to be sure, but can we please every now and then look on the bright side, for chrissake?
Thank you.
The older I get the more convinced I become that the insanity in the human race is the norm rather ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Including you?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Buddhists? Subservient? Where'd you get that idea? Maybe serene, or stoic, or quiet, but subservient? To whom?
I think that's a typical stereotype.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Including you?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Buddhists? Subservient? Where'd you get that idea? Maybe serene, or stoic, or quiet, but subservient? To whom?
I think that's a typical stereotype.
Why all the hate?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think it's mostly atheists filled with hate.
Agnostics are mostly indifferent.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Moravian Yes, it has been, so be original next time.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think it's mostly atheists filled with hate.
Agnostics are mostly indifferent.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Moravian Yes, it has been, so be original next time.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 Sure, but tribes can have sports teams instead of armies, footballs, baseballs and basketballs instead of knives, clubs and guns.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bobby9 Sure, but tribes can have sports teams instead of armies, footballs, baseballs and basketballs instead of knives, clubs and guns.
Is Christianity worse than nihilism?
CarolinaGirl60 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
For me, agnosticism reflects my reality. I don’t call myself a nihilist; I’m a realist. Life is chaos. I try to be optimistic, but deep down, I know that most people sink to the lowest levels rather than rising above.
My realism gives me peace: this life is what I have. I’m responsible for...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Your "realism" isn't very cheerful, is it? In fact it's almost downright nihilistic!
CarolinaGirl60 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
For me, agnosticism reflects my reality. I don’t call myself a nihilist; I’m a realist. Life is chaos. I try to be optimistic, but deep down, I know that most people sink to the lowest levels rather than rising above.
My realism gives me peace: this life is what I have. I’m responsible for...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Your "realism" isn't very cheerful, is it? In fact it's almost downright nihilistic!
Hi there Americans Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison are deists.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 4, 2020:
As for Jefferson, after reading some of his letters I’d say no, Darwin’s theory would not have changed his position. Jefferson was deeply skeptical of Biblical stories and myths, yet leaned toward the idea of a higher consciousness, and he admired some of the teachings of Jesus. There is nothing...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Again, William, well said. You DO have a way with words and understand truly the agnostic position.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 4, 2020:
As for Jefferson, after reading some of his letters I’d say no, Darwin’s theory would not have changed his position. Jefferson was deeply skeptical of Biblical stories and myths, yet leaned toward the idea of a higher consciousness, and he admired some of the teachings of Jesus. There is nothing...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
Again, William, well said. You DO have a way with words and understand truly the agnostic position.
I am a man of modest means.
FearlessFly comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Although I'm in favor of higher degree of re-distribution of wealth . . .
S/He who dies with the most toys wins :P
Good luck changing that . . .
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
That is a moronic saying which people insist on repeating because it sounds so cute and Murphy's Lawish.
Stop it.
We get the irony, okay? The POINT of the irony, which seems to get lost in the knowing smirks, is the accumulation of wealth for it's own sake or for some kind of fleeting status, is childish, shallow, and even harmful and WRONG.
Good luck ending empty, pointless materialism? Like anything else worth doing, it's an agonizingly slow process, but it IS happening.
At least I happen to think so
FearlessFly comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Although I'm in favor of higher degree of re-distribution of wealth . . .
S/He who dies with the most toys wins :P
Good luck changing that . . .
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
That is a moronic saying which people insist on repeating because it sounds so cute and Murphy's Lawish.
Stop it.
We get the irony, okay? The POINT of the irony, which seems to get lost in the knowing smirks, is the accumulation of wealth for it's own sake or for some kind of fleeting status, is childish, shallow, and even harmful and WRONG.
Good luck ending empty, pointless materialism? Like anything else worth doing, it's an agonizingly slow process, but it IS happening.
At least I happen to think so
I am a man of modest means.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Except for the immense wealth OF this country, would you have what you have? Isn't the extent of your 'wealth' derived from this overall wealth?
In other words, if this was a poorer country, wouldn't YOU be poorer as well?
I think most people on this planet should be richer. It's only because some...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Allamanda That is pure corporate greed, which is enshrined in the very nature of corporations, which MUST export from their balance sheets 'externalities' like pollution and human destitution, in the interest of ever higher profits for shareholders. Corporations are TRULY man-made viruses.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Except for the immense wealth OF this country, would you have what you have? Isn't the extent of your 'wealth' derived from this overall wealth?
In other words, if this was a poorer country, wouldn't YOU be poorer as well?
I think most people on this planet should be richer. It's only because some...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Allamanda That is pure corporate greed, which is enshrined in the very nature of corporations, which MUST export from their balance sheets 'externalities' like pollution and human destitution, in the interest of ever higher profits for shareholders. Corporations are TRULY man-made viruses.
I am a man of modest means.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Except for the immense wealth OF this country, would you have what you have? Isn't the extent of your 'wealth' derived from this overall wealth?
In other words, if this was a poorer country, wouldn't YOU be poorer as well?
I think most people on this planet should be richer. It's only because some...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Fernapple You're right from one perspective. ANOTHER perspective has it there are too many people, period. Degradation of the environment AT SOME POINT is inevitable, regardless of individual consumption.
Sure, we could all be recycling vegans living in self-sustaining geodesic domes and theoretically there could be 20 billion or even 40 billion people on this planet, but at some point the Earth itself would collapse under the weight and swallow us all up!
A better number would be about 4 billion.
And get rid of all the cows!
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
Except for the immense wealth OF this country, would you have what you have? Isn't the extent of your 'wealth' derived from this overall wealth?
In other words, if this was a poorer country, wouldn't YOU be poorer as well?
I think most people on this planet should be richer. It's only because some...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Fernapple You're right from one perspective. ANOTHER perspective has it there are too many people, period. Degradation of the environment AT SOME POINT is inevitable, regardless of individual consumption.
Sure, we could all be recycling vegans living in self-sustaining geodesic domes and theoretically there could be 20 billion or even 40 billion people on this planet, but at some point the Earth itself would collapse under the weight and swallow us all up!
A better number would be about 4 billion.
And get rid of all the cows!
Why all the hate?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think it's mostly atheists filled with hate.
Agnostics are mostly indifferent.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Moravian I said I THINK, based on what I read on here. So no 'facts' or 'statistics,' just my opinion based on personal experience.
Believe it or not, something can be true without a bunch of 'statistics' to back it up.
AND there can be a difference between subjective truth and objective truth. In other words, something can be true for one person and not for another.
OBJECTIVE truth, on the other hand, is true for everybody. Totally different.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 4, 2020:
I think it's mostly atheists filled with hate.
Agnostics are mostly indifferent.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Moravian I said I THINK, based on what I read on here. So no 'facts' or 'statistics,' just my opinion based on personal experience.
Believe it or not, something can be true without a bunch of 'statistics' to back it up.
AND there can be a difference between subjective truth and objective truth. In other words, something can be true for one person and not for another.
OBJECTIVE truth, on the other hand, is true for everybody. Totally different.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bushshaker I think you're too much a 'prisoner of the moment.'
From a larger perspective, there is NO WAY anyone is taking away your gun (unless it's an AK-47 or a bazooka or a sidewinder missle)!
But go ahead and obsess about it. Someone has to I guess, and nobody can stop you!
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@Bushshaker I think you're too much a 'prisoner of the moment.'
From a larger perspective, there is NO WAY anyone is taking away your gun (unless it's an AK-47 or a bazooka or a sidewinder missle)!
But go ahead and obsess about it. Someone has to I guess, and nobody can stop you!
spread agnosticism
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@David1955 Religionist--a person who manifests devotion to a deity.
Um...no.
Sorry.
You of course are free to believe anything you want. It doesn't MATTER to me what you think, or believe.
I myself don't BELIEVE anything.
If atheism can be described as an 'anti-religion,' then you are most certainly an anti-religionist, right? Such a strong reaction to a belief system is in itself a belief system. In that way, theists and antitheists are two sides of the same coin. Agnostics are outside that cycle of belief and disbelief, or unbelief. I don't care what the formal definitions say, you both disbelieve and 'unbelieve.'
I TOLD you what my definition of 'god' might be--it's very vague because I don't think the word can be defined, since we have no idea what we are defining, if anything.
But I DO think there may be something worth defining. I've tried to come up with another word or phrase for it but there doesn't seem to be one.
Look, you are a typical reactionary atheist, okay? There's nothing WRONG with that, except for your need to attack anyone who doesn't disbelieve with as much vehement vociferousness as yourself.
That's your business. But don't pretend to be superior to me in the 'purity' and absolute simplistic-ness of your pseudo-convictions.
You KNOW nothing, yet pretend to know the truthfulness and falsity of everything worth knowing about.
I just happen to disagree with that assessment.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 4, 2020:
@David1955 Religionist--a person who manifests devotion to a deity.
Um...no.
Sorry.
You of course are free to believe anything you want. It doesn't MATTER to me what you think, or believe.
I myself don't BELIEVE anything.
If atheism can be described as an 'anti-religion,' then you are most certainly an anti-religionist, right? Such a strong reaction to a belief system is in itself a belief system. In that way, theists and antitheists are two sides of the same coin. Agnostics are outside that cycle of belief and disbelief, or unbelief. I don't care what the formal definitions say, you both disbelieve and 'unbelieve.'
I TOLD you what my definition of 'god' might be--it's very vague because I don't think the word can be defined, since we have no idea what we are defining, if anything.
But I DO think there may be something worth defining. I've tried to come up with another word or phrase for it but there doesn't seem to be one.
Look, you are a typical reactionary atheist, okay? There's nothing WRONG with that, except for your need to attack anyone who doesn't disbelieve with as much vehement vociferousness as yourself.
That's your business. But don't pretend to be superior to me in the 'purity' and absolute simplistic-ness of your pseudo-convictions.
You KNOW nothing, yet pretend to know the truthfulness and falsity of everything worth knowing about.
I just happen to disagree with that assessment.
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@Bobby9, @Bushshaker GUNS aren't blocking anything, minds are.
I'm pro-second amendment (with Supreme Court-sanctioned restrictions) including the part about a "well-regulated" militia, not a free-for-all orgy of gun nuts. Criminals and crazy people shouldn't have guns! Or is that too regulated for you?
This fantastical World Government, rest assured, is so far from being a reality (unfortunately) you won't be needing your gun any time soon to protect your "sovereignity!"
Feel better?
Now, put the gun down, tiger...that's it...take a deep breath...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@Bobby9, @Bushshaker GUNS aren't blocking anything, minds are.
I'm pro-second amendment (with Supreme Court-sanctioned restrictions) including the part about a "well-regulated" militia, not a free-for-all orgy of gun nuts. Criminals and crazy people shouldn't have guns! Or is that too regulated for you?
This fantastical World Government, rest assured, is so far from being a reality (unfortunately) you won't be needing your gun any time soon to protect your "sovereignity!"
Feel better?
Now, put the gun down, tiger...that's it...take a deep breath...
What do you all think of the Illuminati?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@Bobby9 Why?
If it actually happened (very unlikely verging on impossible) it'd be a very good thing (if it was Democratic and not something horrible).
If no one talks about it and/or works toward it, it definitely WON'T happen.
So there's my little plug.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I have an Illuminati symbol around my neck. I bought it online
It's a society interested in world government, a new world order, an end to war and agression, an end to religion, world peace, personal wealth and well being, an end to borders, etc.
I agree with most if not all of their principles ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@Bobby9 Why?
If it actually happened (very unlikely verging on impossible) it'd be a very good thing (if it was Democratic and not something horrible).
If no one talks about it and/or works toward it, it definitely WON'T happen.
So there's my little plug.
Does anyone else notice the cabin fever that's revealing itself in some of these posts?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I haven't noticed.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@desertastronomer Right.
Maybe it's because I'm a recluse anyway!
Storm1752 comments on Apr 3, 2020:
I haven't noticed.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@desertastronomer Right.
Maybe it's because I'm a recluse anyway!
spread agnosticism
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@David1955 I know you don't; a lot of Agnostics do. That's why I brought all that up, to give examples of things Agnostics speculate about freely, because there are certain REASONS (including circumstantial EVIDENCE, among many other things) which would lead a reasonable person to think such things are possible.
This is not "religion," merely interesting topics for conversation.
There are many atheist "wolves" (if I understand your word correctly) ok n here. Agnostics are gentle people with inquiring minds. After all, there must be Explanations for life's mysteries, other than 'this that, or the other thing' is false.
SOMETHING must be true.
Why don't you expand your thinking and consider non-religious things with more open-mindedness?
It'd do you good.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@David1955 I know you don't; a lot of Agnostics do. That's why I brought all that up, to give examples of things Agnostics speculate about freely, because there are certain REASONS (including circumstantial EVIDENCE, among many other things) which would lead a reasonable person to think such things are possible.
This is not "religion," merely interesting topics for conversation.
There are many atheist "wolves" (if I understand your word correctly) ok n here. Agnostics are gentle people with inquiring minds. After all, there must be Explanations for life's mysteries, other than 'this that, or the other thing' is false.
SOMETHING must be true.
Why don't you expand your thinking and consider non-religious things with more open-mindedness?
It'd do you good.
spread agnosticism
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@David1955 A 'god' which as something to do with a 'collective unconcious' or a 'universal consciousness' or something like that. Certainly not a personal Abrahamic entity.
Btw, not trying to come up with pitch-perfect turns of phrases or be a champion wordsmith.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 3, 2020:
@David1955 A 'god' which as something to do with a 'collective unconcious' or a 'universal consciousness' or something like that. Certainly not a personal Abrahamic entity.
Btw, not trying to come up with pitch-perfect turns of phrases or be a champion wordsmith.
spread agnosticism
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 False.
There has ALWAYS been a division between the two, as if you didn't know.
True: an atheists' mind is made up. An agnostic is not trying to make up his or her mind because there is nothing to decide.
True: an atheist's mind is narrow on the subject. An agnosticist's mind is wide open.
True: an atheist does not speculate about something of which he or she is all but certain. They DO scoff a lot, though!
True: the 'argument' is tired and worn because the 'issues' are in reality non-existent, except in some people's minds. It's beating a dead horse.
I brought this up in the first place to respond as to the true nature of agnosticosm, not to belittle atheists. But it's hard to do so without drawing the sharp contrast between the two 'non-religious groups.'
Actually I'm not religious OR non-religious.
Religion (Theism) is a belief system, as is atheism. Agnosticism, by contrast, is NOT a belief system.
I think reincarnation is real. You'd say that's religious.
I think extraterrestials are real and among us.
I think psychism and the paranormal are real. You might say that's quasi-religious.
Everything to you is false unless PROVEN scientifically beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I have no such narrowly-defined strictures. I have OPINIONS based on the best available information, with no need to reflexively reject everything outside a narrow band of absolute certainty.
If you want to interpret that as sowing seeds of division, be my guest.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 False.
There has ALWAYS been a division between the two, as if you didn't know.
True: an atheists' mind is made up. An agnostic is not trying to make up his or her mind because there is nothing to decide.
True: an atheist's mind is narrow on the subject. An agnosticist's mind is wide open.
True: an atheist does not speculate about something of which he or she is all but certain. They DO scoff a lot, though!
True: the 'argument' is tired and worn because the 'issues' are in reality non-existent, except in some people's minds. It's beating a dead horse.
I brought this up in the first place to respond as to the true nature of agnosticosm, not to belittle atheists. But it's hard to do so without drawing the sharp contrast between the two 'non-religious groups.'
Actually I'm not religious OR non-religious.
Religion (Theism) is a belief system, as is atheism. Agnosticism, by contrast, is NOT a belief system.
I think reincarnation is real. You'd say that's religious.
I think extraterrestials are real and among us.
I think psychism and the paranormal are real. You might say that's quasi-religious.
Everything to you is false unless PROVEN scientifically beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I have no such narrowly-defined strictures. I have OPINIONS based on the best available information, with no need to reflexively reject everything outside a narrow band of absolute certainty.
If you want to interpret that as sowing seeds of division, be my guest.
Forget about toilet paper, it's time to hoard more essential things ..
[melmagazine.com]
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Why toilet paper?
Bowl water works better.
Toys? My hand works fine.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Well we are anatomically different...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Why toilet paper?
Bowl water works better.
Toys? My hand works fine.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Well we are anatomically different...
spread agnosticism
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 No, because an atheist's mind is made up.
No room in their narrow minds for speculation on the subject of 'god' and a lot of other related topics.
And don't start with the hair-splitting again. No Agnosticist wants to hear the old tired arguments Agnostics and atheists are somehow 'related' or joined at the hip. They are VERY distinct groups.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Agnosticism is just being honest with oneself and, unlike atheism, it allows one to freely speculate because although one cannot claim knowledge, one cannot rule OUT a lot of things, either.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 No, because an atheist's mind is made up.
No room in their narrow minds for speculation on the subject of 'god' and a lot of other related topics.
And don't start with the hair-splitting again. No Agnosticist wants to hear the old tired arguments Agnostics and atheists are somehow 'related' or joined at the hip. They are VERY distinct groups.
spread agnosticism
David1955 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
While you are at it, spread atheism.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 Yeah he's AGNOSTIC, not atheist.
Big difference.
David1955 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
While you are at it, spread atheism.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
@David1955 Yeah he's AGNOSTIC, not atheist.
Big difference.
spread agnosticism
MarkWD comments on Apr 1, 2020:
Agnosticism applied broadly, recognizes that every belief is potentially modifiable based on new learning.
Scientific process can only test a proposition if there is some manner in which it could be shown to be false. Good science demands honesty and humility and therefore avoids endorsing ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
Very useful insight and analysis.
Thank you.
MarkWD comments on Apr 1, 2020:
Agnosticism applied broadly, recognizes that every belief is potentially modifiable based on new learning.
Scientific process can only test a proposition if there is some manner in which it could be shown to be false. Good science demands honesty and humility and therefore avoids endorsing ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 1, 2020:
Very useful insight and analysis.
Thank you.
Forget about toilet paper, it's time to hoard more essential things ..
[melmagazine.com]
RoyMillar comments on Mar 31, 2020:
The gift that keeps on giving
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
@RoyMillar fortunately
RoyMillar comments on Mar 31, 2020:
The gift that keeps on giving
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
@RoyMillar fortunately
This chart made me think about how in the last 40-50 years, Libertarian-inspired propaganda — also...
ToolGuy comments on Mar 31, 2020:
After 25 days, the US has 50% MORE cases than the next highest nation did after 37 days. And is close to doubling China’s numbers after 40 days.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
@ToolGuy Apparently Dave's too lazy to think, so he finds it more convenient to not believe anything.
If you want to generalize about some people on this site, that's one trait.
Like the morons who say there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats. How intellectually LAZY!
ToolGuy comments on Mar 31, 2020:
After 25 days, the US has 50% MORE cases than the next highest nation did after 37 days. And is close to doubling China’s numbers after 40 days.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
@ToolGuy Apparently Dave's too lazy to think, so he finds it more convenient to not believe anything.
If you want to generalize about some people on this site, that's one trait.
Like the morons who say there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats. How intellectually LAZY!
This chart made me think about how in the last 40-50 years, Libertarian-inspired propaganda — also...
dave1459 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
I really disagree with the over use of the word propaganda. The word means words meant to sway your thinking. Every word written on this entire site is propaganda. We either want agreement or to get others to agree with us, if they don't now. Advertising, news stores now, speeches of all kinds ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
You don't even know how to correctly spell the name Goebbels!
What do You know???
dave1459 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
I really disagree with the over use of the word propaganda. The word means words meant to sway your thinking. Every word written on this entire site is propaganda. We either want agreement or to get others to agree with us, if they don't now. Advertising, news stores now, speeches of all kinds ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
You don't even know how to correctly spell the name Goebbels!
What do You know???
Like probably a lot of voters, I'm new to politics.
Aurora62 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Both are the same with the exact donors of the elites. We have an illusion that we have 2 parties when in reality we have 1 party and you and I are not part of it.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
That's BS, Aurora. You are exposing your simplistic ignorance.
Aurora62 comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Both are the same with the exact donors of the elites. We have an illusion that we have 2 parties when in reality we have 1 party and you and I are not part of it.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
That's BS, Aurora. You are exposing your simplistic ignorance.
‪More facts Trump and idiots don’t believe. ‬
powder comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Seasonal flu shot 2019-20; 45% effective. Yes vaccines work but not so well with viruses. Besides, no vaccines developed yet. Viruses just mutate so bloody fast once you develop a vaccine it is ofter out of date with new strains in the community ie 45% effective.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
45% is better than nothing.
powder comments on Mar 31, 2020:
Seasonal flu shot 2019-20; 45% effective. Yes vaccines work but not so well with viruses. Besides, no vaccines developed yet. Viruses just mutate so bloody fast once you develop a vaccine it is ofter out of date with new strains in the community ie 45% effective.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 31, 2020:
45% is better than nothing.
I know we all hate Trump, but seriously, why personify what is really a "vast, right-wing ...
silverotter11 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"It's the ultra-rich/corporation CEOs
conspiring to do this to us, to divide us and thus conquer us, so we won't rebel and unite against them." An accurate statement and something I have been aware of for sometime. I've called my reps, they all all dems but of course the dems are part of th ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Not that this country was that great to begin with!
silverotter11 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"It's the ultra-rich/corporation CEOs
conspiring to do this to us, to divide us and thus conquer us, so we won't rebel and unite against them." An accurate statement and something I have been aware of for sometime. I've called my reps, they all all dems but of course the dems are part of th ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Not that this country was that great to begin with!
I know we all hate Trump, but seriously, why personify what is really a "vast, right-wing ...
freeofgod comments on Mar 28, 2020:
trump is just so f...ing blatant about breaking laws.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
Oh, so you want someone less blatant?
freeofgod comments on Mar 28, 2020:
trump is just so f...ing blatant about breaking laws.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
Oh, so you want someone less blatant?
I know we all hate Trump, but seriously, why personify what is really a "vast, right-wing ...
David1955 comments on Mar 29, 2020:
I tend to think like a historian, because that was my first field and it is how my mind works. What are the causal factors? What is the wider context? What led to X or Y, thinking beyond contemporaneous thinking?
So, the more I think about Trumpism, the more I put my historian hat on.
I've ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Who'd lead it?
David1955 comments on Mar 29, 2020:
I tend to think like a historian, because that was my first field and it is how my mind works. What are the causal factors? What is the wider context? What led to X or Y, thinking beyond contemporaneous thinking?
So, the more I think about Trumpism, the more I put my historian hat on.
I've ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
@AnneWimsey Who'd lead it?
I know we all hate Trump, but seriously, why personify what is really a "vast, right-wing ...
silverotter11 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"It's the ultra-rich/corporation CEOs
conspiring to do this to us, to divide us and thus conquer us, so we won't rebel and unite against them." An accurate statement and something I have been aware of for sometime. I've called my reps, they all all dems but of course the dems are part of th ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
Propaganda porn?
I love it.
Just turn on the TV and wait a second...there it is!
silverotter11 comments on Mar 28, 2020:
"It's the ultra-rich/corporation CEOs
conspiring to do this to us, to divide us and thus conquer us, so we won't rebel and unite against them." An accurate statement and something I have been aware of for sometime. I've called my reps, they all all dems but of course the dems are part of th ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
Propaganda porn?
I love it.
Just turn on the TV and wait a second...there it is!
I know we all hate Trump, but seriously, why personify what is really a "vast, right-wing ...
David1955 comments on Mar 29, 2020:
I tend to think like a historian, because that was my first field and it is how my mind works. What are the causal factors? What is the wider context? What led to X or Y, thinking beyond contemporaneous thinking?
So, the more I think about Trumpism, the more I put my historian hat on.
I've ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
White privilege is part of it. A LOT of things are part of it. The ROOT cause is, as usual, money and the lust for it. Money, of course, buys happiness, freedom from servitude, luxury, everything anyone could want to live a wonderful life. The endless commercials pound that into our psyches. Every notice how ecstatic everyone in commercials are? And why not? They have everything they could possibly want! Nice cars, beautiful homes, all the latest products and gadgets to make things beautiful and easy! They don't appear to work very hard, if at all. And beautiful? Omg! Most women came out of a fashion magazine! Most of the men are handsome and have great jobs!
Yes, life is great IF you fit into this fantasy scenario. This is what you must strive for! THIS is what life is all about!
No wonder the "privileged few" go to such great lengths to hoard as much as possible for themselves, because the more money, the more of everything worth having you can have!
So "white privilege" is really "personal privilege," in my eyes. The fact you're white is beside the point. "White privilege" only works if you are rich! After all, there are plenty of poor whites, slaving away at hopelessly dead-end jobs, behind in the bills, no health care, no nothing! So they look around for scapegoats, and political leaders will offer many (you know the list), EXCEPT the one that matters: themselves and their denial of their own greed. Because who needs scapegoats if one is happy?
And WHY is one not happy?
Not enough money.
People like us are different, though.
We want EVERYBODY to be happy. We want everybody to have roughly the same amount of material things. A teacher makes 1/10,000th of a CEO? It's not fair. It's not. A janitor makes pennies while the administrator makes hundreds? In what universe is this okay?
So this makes us radicals. We're criticized for not getting with the capitalist program. Everybody is rewarded according to their worth, don't we know that?
Lies. We are surrounded by an ocean of them. The hypocrisy is thick and suffocating.
When the truth is, we want equality. We want what THEY have.
So all this political and ideological posturing boils down to this simple, inescapable, and perfectly understandable fact.
We should have it, too. We deserve it.
How do we get it? More taxes and bigger, more efficient government, of course.
By the way, what did 'Jesus' do for a living, the fictitious 'god' we're all supposed to emulate so much?
Nothing, unless you count spouting a lot of meaningless platitudes. Oh, and performing 'miracles!' So, why is HE so privileged?
Now, if he'd have REALLY saved people by creating a better financial system in which EVERYBODY was rich, hey, I'd be the first one in church every Sunday!
Ah, the mysteries of life indeed!
David1955 comments on Mar 29, 2020:
I tend to think like a historian, because that was my first field and it is how my mind works. What are the causal factors? What is the wider context? What led to X or Y, thinking beyond contemporaneous thinking?
So, the more I think about Trumpism, the more I put my historian hat on.
I've ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 29, 2020:
White privilege is part of it. A LOT of things are part of it. The ROOT cause is, as usual, money and the lust for it. Money, of course, buys happiness, freedom from servitude, luxury, everything anyone could want to live a wonderful life. The endless commercials pound that into our psyches. Every notice how ecstatic everyone in commercials are? And why not? They have everything they could possibly want! Nice cars, beautiful homes, all the latest products and gadgets to make things beautiful and easy! They don't appear to work very hard, if at all. And beautiful? Omg! Most women came out of a fashion magazine! Most of the men are handsome and have great jobs!
Yes, life is great IF you fit into this fantasy scenario. This is what you must strive for! THIS is what life is all about!
No wonder the "privileged few" go to such great lengths to hoard as much as possible for themselves, because the more money, the more of everything worth having you can have!
So "white privilege" is really "personal privilege," in my eyes. The fact you're white is beside the point. "White privilege" only works if you are rich! After all, there are plenty of poor whites, slaving away at hopelessly dead-end jobs, behind in the bills, no health care, no nothing! So they look around for scapegoats, and political leaders will offer many (you know the list), EXCEPT the one that matters: themselves and their denial of their own greed. Because who needs scapegoats if one is happy?
And WHY is one not happy?
Not enough money.
People like us are different, though.
We want EVERYBODY to be happy. We want everybody to have roughly the same amount of material things. A teacher makes 1/10,000th of a CEO? It's not fair. It's not. A janitor makes pennies while the administrator makes hundreds? In what universe is this okay?
So this makes us radicals. We're criticized for not getting with the capitalist program. Everybody is rewarded according to their worth, don't we know that?
Lies. We are surrounded by an ocean of them. The hypocrisy is thick and suffocating.
When the truth is, we want equality. We want what THEY have.
So all this political and ideological posturing boils down to this simple, inescapable, and perfectly understandable fact.
We should have it, too. We deserve it.
How do we get it? More taxes and bigger, more efficient government, of course.
By the way, what did 'Jesus' do for a living, the fictitious 'god' we're all supposed to emulate so much?
Nothing, unless you count spouting a lot of meaningless platitudes. Oh, and performing 'miracles!' So, why is HE so privileged?
Now, if he'd have REALLY saved people by creating a better financial system in which EVERYBODY was rich, hey, I'd be the first one in church every Sunday!
Ah, the mysteries of life indeed!
Why I Am Not A Christian
[academia.edu]
Storm1752 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
I'm not a Christian because in all likelihood Christ was not an actual historical person.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 28, 2020:
@MikeInBatonRouge I think the Flavian emperors, possibly through the penmanship of Josephus or someone very much like him, fabricated the myth after Masada in 70 A.D.
The Jews were beaten and dispersed, no longer a threat, not even a presence, and they filled the vacuum by creating a more placid and compliant religion complete with a figurehead savior, based loosely on many real zealots, but not real himself in any way, shape, or form.
It seems obvious to me, based on my research, and is the reason I'm not a Christian.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
I'm not a Christian because in all likelihood Christ was not an actual historical person.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 28, 2020:
@MikeInBatonRouge I think the Flavian emperors, possibly through the penmanship of Josephus or someone very much like him, fabricated the myth after Masada in 70 A.D.
The Jews were beaten and dispersed, no longer a threat, not even a presence, and they filled the vacuum by creating a more placid and compliant religion complete with a figurehead savior, based loosely on many real zealots, but not real himself in any way, shape, or form.
It seems obvious to me, based on my research, and is the reason I'm not a Christian.
Why I Am Not A Christian
[academia.edu]
Storm1752 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
I'm not a Christian because in all likelihood Christ was not an actual historical person.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 28, 2020:
@mathman27 I've read a lot about it and came to that conclusion. I'm sure you are familiar with all the arguments...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
I'm not a Christian because in all likelihood Christ was not an actual historical person.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 28, 2020:
@mathman27 I've read a lot about it and came to that conclusion. I'm sure you are familiar with all the arguments...
😃 Nice boobies, yes?
Paul4747 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
Damn, this thing is getting to me.
All I could think about at first was how they're not 6 feet apart.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 27, 2020:
Funny...that's not what I was thinking: is there someone taking the picture or is the phone on remote?
Paul4747 comments on Mar 27, 2020:
Damn, this thing is getting to me.
All I could think about at first was how they're not 6 feet apart.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 27, 2020:
Funny...that's not what I was thinking: is there someone taking the picture or is the phone on remote?
My bet is that it is no coincidence that the Roman Empire fell not to long after it was ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 26, 2020:
You mean the WESTERN Roman Empire. The Eastern part of it survived another 1000 years.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Archeus_Lore yeah right
Storm1752 comments on Mar 26, 2020:
You mean the WESTERN Roman Empire. The Eastern part of it survived another 1000 years.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Archeus_Lore yeah right
athiest and agnostic?
Allamanda comments on Mar 26, 2020:
Did you do a search for the last 500 versions of this question?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Allamanda That's just it: there IS nothing to discuss!
There never is!
Allamanda comments on Mar 26, 2020:
Did you do a search for the last 500 versions of this question?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Allamanda That's just it: there IS nothing to discuss!
There never is!
athiest and agnostic?
Storm1752 comments on Mar 26, 2020:
I don't understand the question. Could you flesh it out a bit?
Anyway I'm atheist about a personal Abrahamic god, but agnostic about the potential (probable?) Explanation for existence itself.
After all, there MUST be an explanation, right?
But what is it?
Do YOU know?
Does ANYBODY know?
I ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@AkEyHeAdAkE But there IS no evidence!
Aieeee!
Eeeek!
Storm1752 comments on Mar 26, 2020:
I don't understand the question. Could you flesh it out a bit?
Anyway I'm atheist about a personal Abrahamic god, but agnostic about the potential (probable?) Explanation for existence itself.
After all, there MUST be an explanation, right?
But what is it?
Do YOU know?
Does ANYBODY know?
I ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@AkEyHeAdAkE But there IS no evidence!
Aieeee!
Eeeek!
athiest and agnostic?
Allamanda comments on Mar 26, 2020:
Did you do a search for the last 500 versions of this question?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Allamanda My stance on the question has evolved, so I don't think it's boring.
It's just the answer is so obvious one wonders why it's constantly asked.
Allamanda comments on Mar 26, 2020:
Did you do a search for the last 500 versions of this question?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 26, 2020:
@Allamanda My stance on the question has evolved, so I don't think it's boring.
It's just the answer is so obvious one wonders why it's constantly asked.
As I respect the level 'Agnostic' sits on, I wonder, whom could challenge or logically deny that ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 5, 2020:
I'd go along with that word, except I've made up my OWN definition of god as being some sort of 'universal consciousness,' or, more precisely, 'something in the Neo-Deist vein.'
I consider MY definition superior to all others so, in my own opinion, I myself am possessed of superior judgment and ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 23, 2020:
@AnTwanSr What I wonder is, if there WAS a site called 'Ignostics.com,' what would there be to talk about?
AND, how long would it be before atheists moved in and began insisting ignostics are really atheists, etc., etc., begin engaging in heated debates with them about the whole 'issue,' and begin dominating every discussion and eventually crowd them out entirely?!?
Ah but THAT couldn't happen, could it?🤔
Storm1752 comments on Mar 5, 2020:
I'd go along with that word, except I've made up my OWN definition of god as being some sort of 'universal consciousness,' or, more precisely, 'something in the Neo-Deist vein.'
I consider MY definition superior to all others so, in my own opinion, I myself am possessed of superior judgment and ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 23, 2020:
@AnTwanSr What I wonder is, if there WAS a site called 'Ignostics.com,' what would there be to talk about?
AND, how long would it be before atheists moved in and began insisting ignostics are really atheists, etc., etc., begin engaging in heated debates with them about the whole 'issue,' and begin dominating every discussion and eventually crowd them out entirely?!?
Ah but THAT couldn't happen, could it?🤔
Anyone else find pantheism (sexed up atheism) interesting?
p-nullifidian comments on Mar 21, 2020:
Pantheism, a belief that god, whatever it / she / he represents, permeates everything, is not scientifically demonstrable, nor is it 'sexed up atheism.' One may as well refer to it as 'the Force.' And what is the 'essence' or 'particle' that we can observe and measure in everything that is god? If ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
Because it allows for things such as reward-punishment and an afterlife, for two of many things atheism dismisses out-of-hand.
p-nullifidian comments on Mar 21, 2020:
Pantheism, a belief that god, whatever it / she / he represents, permeates everything, is not scientifically demonstrable, nor is it 'sexed up atheism.' One may as well refer to it as 'the Force.' And what is the 'essence' or 'particle' that we can observe and measure in everything that is god? If ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
Because it allows for things such as reward-punishment and an afterlife, for two of many things atheism dismisses out-of-hand.
Anyone else find pantheism (sexed up atheism) interesting?
MrDMC comments on Mar 21, 2020:
The Buddhist says that everything is mind. The Buddhist also says that everything is Buddha. We don't want to get to bogged down with semantics. But I guess there is no SUPREME being but THE being. So you might call it atheistic. But then life after death, (reincarnation,) as well as spirits ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
BINGO.
MrDMC comments on Mar 21, 2020:
The Buddhist says that everything is mind. The Buddhist also says that everything is Buddha. We don't want to get to bogged down with semantics. But I guess there is no SUPREME being but THE being. So you might call it atheistic. But then life after death, (reincarnation,) as well as spirits ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
BINGO.
Someone recently argued that greater educational attainment in first nations is the driver behind a ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 6, 2020:
No, you had it right the first time. Education leads to a decline in religiosity in most cases.
There is no "instinctual attribution of the unknown to supernatural forces," as you so laboriously put it.
What learned, erudite nonsense!
You seem to revel in using incendiary ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
@Nunya Either way, I totally disagree with that statement. You seem to think the institution of public education itself is anti-religious and harbors antipathy toward religion, almost as if it is a deliberate competitor for the allegiances of impressionable children. That's certainly what many religionists think. Which is why they think the teaching of sex education or evolution, for instance, is Satanic; so the teachers and administrators must be Satanic.
Which is why many of these religionist parents refuse to participate and let their children attend.
But they're wrong to think that, of course. The curriculum is fact-based, which means it often and necessarily contradicts the bible.
But that means the EDUCATION itself, the facts learned, lead to the "decline of religious adherence," not the "secular institution."
To say that is ridiculous.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 6, 2020:
No, you had it right the first time. Education leads to a decline in religiosity in most cases.
There is no "instinctual attribution of the unknown to supernatural forces," as you so laboriously put it.
What learned, erudite nonsense!
You seem to revel in using incendiary ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 21, 2020:
@Nunya Either way, I totally disagree with that statement. You seem to think the institution of public education itself is anti-religious and harbors antipathy toward religion, almost as if it is a deliberate competitor for the allegiances of impressionable children. That's certainly what many religionists think. Which is why they think the teaching of sex education or evolution, for instance, is Satanic; so the teachers and administrators must be Satanic.
Which is why many of these religionist parents refuse to participate and let their children attend.
But they're wrong to think that, of course. The curriculum is fact-based, which means it often and necessarily contradicts the bible.
But that means the EDUCATION itself, the facts learned, lead to the "decline of religious adherence," not the "secular institution."
To say that is ridiculous.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 20, 2020:
@Omnedon Thanks for the discussion.
I'm sure we'll talk again.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 20, 2020:
@Omnedon Thanks for the discussion.
I'm sure we'll talk again.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 20, 2020:
@Omnedon There IS evidence for it, just not the 'hard evidence' you require. This indicates a closed mind.
Reincarnation has been 'proven' circumstantially, for instance, in study after study.
The pyramids and other structures have been 'proven' to be non-buildable by the Egyptians at the time, and it's a very likely they are pre-Ice Age.
There IS credible evidence extraterrestials have been and probably ARE here, as I've mentioned before. You simply shut it out.
Psychism? Edgar Cayce is a well-known psychic of indisputable reputation. You seem so invested in your skepticism you're unable to acknowledge it.
The list goes on.
I don't even like the word "supernatural," because it implies 'magic,' when it actually denotes things not detectable by our five senses; this doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist.
I'm not saying this means a redefinition of 'god' is appropriate, but I'm not saying it isn't either.
About the Big Bounce, have you even read about it, as a competing 'theory?'
Just because the Big Bang is currently favored doesn't mean it's true, any more than it's true the sun revolves around the Earth.
But you seem comfortably ensconsed in your reactionary bubble, so to speak.
I'm not claiming truth, just the possibility of truth. I don't believe IN any of these things I've mentioned; just it's been convincingly advocated for.
Even crop circles: widely dismissed as the work of tricksters, there are scores of them impossible to explain as done by two men with shovels and kite string.
Anyway, it's been fun talking to you.
Have a nice day.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 20, 2020:
@Omnedon There IS evidence for it, just not the 'hard evidence' you require. This indicates a closed mind.
Reincarnation has been 'proven' circumstantially, for instance, in study after study.
The pyramids and other structures have been 'proven' to be non-buildable by the Egyptians at the time, and it's a very likely they are pre-Ice Age.
There IS credible evidence extraterrestials have been and probably ARE here, as I've mentioned before. You simply shut it out.
Psychism? Edgar Cayce is a well-known psychic of indisputable reputation. You seem so invested in your skepticism you're unable to acknowledge it.
The list goes on.
I don't even like the word "supernatural," because it implies 'magic,' when it actually denotes things not detectable by our five senses; this doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist.
I'm not saying this means a redefinition of 'god' is appropriate, but I'm not saying it isn't either.
About the Big Bounce, have you even read about it, as a competing 'theory?'
Just because the Big Bang is currently favored doesn't mean it's true, any more than it's true the sun revolves around the Earth.
But you seem comfortably ensconsed in your reactionary bubble, so to speak.
I'm not claiming truth, just the possibility of truth. I don't believe IN any of these things I've mentioned; just it's been convincingly advocated for.
Even crop circles: widely dismissed as the work of tricksters, there are scores of them impossible to explain as done by two men with shovels and kite string.
Anyway, it's been fun talking to you.
Have a nice day.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon Yes I think science may eventually find the answers to some of the natural world's greatest mysteries, the cliche-ridden ones like, 'Who am I (consciousness),?' and, 'Where did I come from (the essence and origins of human beings)?' And even deeper ones, like how the universe came into being, if it ever was NOT there! Btw, there is a serious challenge to the Big Bang, having to do with the two universal forces of gravity and electromagnetism, called the Big Bounce, postulating expansions and contractions are cyclical, and may continue on and on indefinitely. So, theoretically it may be the universe never WAS created, and may never end, which runs counter to the Judeo-Christian model which asserts God created the world and someday will end it, at least in it's current form.
So, if all the Mysteries can be scientifically explained without resorting to a divine deity, why not other riddles like reincarnation, the afterlife (yes or no), psychism and other 'supernatural' or 'paranormal' phenomenon (which atheists love to scoff at), how inhabitants of other planets overcome the speed of light, super-ancient, pre-Ice Age advanced civilizations like Mu and Atlantis, etc.
One way or the other, I think, at the rate our knowledge base is accelerating thanks to the computer and other advances, it's possible all these questions will be answered conclusively and not so far into the future.
We'll KNOW if all these things and much more are real, or made up nonsense.
As far as I'm concerned, the faster the better to erase age-old superstition and ignorance, and kick us as a species into the present day.
So, if we can answer THESE questions, why not the biggest mystery of them all, the root essence of existence itself?
The answer to THAT question will tell us more than any religion certainly, what 'god' is.
Or isn't.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon Yes I think science may eventually find the answers to some of the natural world's greatest mysteries, the cliche-ridden ones like, 'Who am I (consciousness),?' and, 'Where did I come from (the essence and origins of human beings)?' And even deeper ones, like how the universe came into being, if it ever was NOT there! Btw, there is a serious challenge to the Big Bang, having to do with the two universal forces of gravity and electromagnetism, called the Big Bounce, postulating expansions and contractions are cyclical, and may continue on and on indefinitely. So, theoretically it may be the universe never WAS created, and may never end, which runs counter to the Judeo-Christian model which asserts God created the world and someday will end it, at least in it's current form.
So, if all the Mysteries can be scientifically explained without resorting to a divine deity, why not other riddles like reincarnation, the afterlife (yes or no), psychism and other 'supernatural' or 'paranormal' phenomenon (which atheists love to scoff at), how inhabitants of other planets overcome the speed of light, super-ancient, pre-Ice Age advanced civilizations like Mu and Atlantis, etc.
One way or the other, I think, at the rate our knowledge base is accelerating thanks to the computer and other advances, it's possible all these questions will be answered conclusively and not so far into the future.
We'll KNOW if all these things and much more are real, or made up nonsense.
As far as I'm concerned, the faster the better to erase age-old superstition and ignorance, and kick us as a species into the present day.
So, if we can answer THESE questions, why not the biggest mystery of them all, the root essence of existence itself?
The answer to THAT question will tell us more than any religion certainly, what 'god' is.
Or isn't.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon But there IS evidence.
They just ignore it.
I suppose it'd take an actual visitation by an entity.
I don't define god as an entity, so I don't need a visitation, just something more scientifically conclusive.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon But there IS evidence.
They just ignore it.
I suppose it'd take an actual visitation by an entity.
I don't define god as an entity, so I don't need a visitation, just something more scientifically conclusive.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon I know of no agnostic who says we'll never know if there's a god or not.
Probably we won't, but who knows?
Again, it depends on how you define the word and what god actually is, right?
A good start would be to discover the origin--if any--of the universe.
The suspicion strengthens the Big Bang never happened, and if it has always been here (eternally cycling through from extreme condensation to explosion to the outer limits of expansion, and contraction again, over and over again) and IF it can be proved it was never created, well then, we wouldn't need a god to create it, would we? We'd be that closer to an answer, wouldn't we?
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Omnedon I know of no agnostic who says we'll never know if there's a god or not.
Probably we won't, but who knows?
Again, it depends on how you define the word and what god actually is, right?
A good start would be to discover the origin--if any--of the universe.
The suspicion strengthens the Big Bang never happened, and if it has always been here (eternally cycling through from extreme condensation to explosion to the outer limits of expansion, and contraction again, over and over again) and IF it can be proved it was never created, well then, we wouldn't need a god to create it, would we? We'd be that closer to an answer, wouldn't we?
I am watching a very interesting and thought provoking program, "Alien Gods", available free on ...
Bierbasstard comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Pseudoarchaeology: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/09/03/what-archaeologists-really-think-about-ancient-aliens-lost-colonies-and-fingerprints-of-the-gods/#50765cd57ab0
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Bierbasstard Start worshipping what?
Aliens?
What am odd notion...why would I do that?
Bierbasstard comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Pseudoarchaeology: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/09/03/what-archaeologists-really-think-about-ancient-aliens-lost-colonies-and-fingerprints-of-the-gods/#50765cd57ab0
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@Bierbasstard Start worshipping what?
Aliens?
What am odd notion...why would I do that?
I am 54 years ole qne will be an agnostic until I die.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Some people just can't accept Atheism and Theism are two sides of the same coin.
Both demand we 'take a stand" and 'get off the fence.'
We are constantly being scoffed at for not believing either way.
I'd say I'm Ignostic but I do enjoy speculating because my brand of no-belief trends toward the...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@AmyTheBruce It has much more to do with the person himself or herself, than whether or not they're one 'ism' or another.
Whatever belief system one adopts is used as a tool to separate--and in so doing elevate--oneself above others.
'Ists' feel a psychological/emotional need to think of themselves as 'special,' better, superior, more intelligent, etc., probably to achieve inner balance and equilibrium.
But the particular INDIVIDUAL decides how to best employ that special, esoteric knowledge to achieve contentment--whether or not to attack or accommodate, reject or accept, be a foe or a friend.
So one can identify with a certain group of 'like-minded' people, but it's often a solitary search for personal relevance and meaning.
Many people have a deep need to feel unique, not a member of a group.
I'm speaking for myself as well as others: my beliefs and opinions have evolved to fit my situation, and might be very different if my circumstances were.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Some people just can't accept Atheism and Theism are two sides of the same coin.
Both demand we 'take a stand" and 'get off the fence.'
We are constantly being scoffed at for not believing either way.
I'd say I'm Ignostic but I do enjoy speculating because my brand of no-belief trends toward the...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 19, 2020:
@AmyTheBruce It has much more to do with the person himself or herself, than whether or not they're one 'ism' or another.
Whatever belief system one adopts is used as a tool to separate--and in so doing elevate--oneself above others.
'Ists' feel a psychological/emotional need to think of themselves as 'special,' better, superior, more intelligent, etc., probably to achieve inner balance and equilibrium.
But the particular INDIVIDUAL decides how to best employ that special, esoteric knowledge to achieve contentment--whether or not to attack or accommodate, reject or accept, be a foe or a friend.
So one can identify with a certain group of 'like-minded' people, but it's often a solitary search for personal relevance and meaning.
Many people have a deep need to feel unique, not a member of a group.
I'm speaking for myself as well as others: my beliefs and opinions have evolved to fit my situation, and might be very different if my circumstances were.
A few rambling observations on feel-good faith…
I gave up my religious beliefs years ago, and ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 18, 2020:
@Omnedon I surmise (suppose without hard evidence) there's not only life, but intelligent life, on other planets.
Likewise, I surmise both no personal, Abrahamic god, and also a unifying, all-encompassing 'force' which accounts for the existence of the universe and gives it it's vitality.
I surmise such things as reincarnation, some paranormal activity, extraterrestials, etc., are real things. But don't KNOW.
I'm as close to KNOWING as I can be, on the other hand, there is much we don't know and may never know.
The human race is evolving, growing, learning new things every day, but some things seem out of reach. Maybe not. Who knows?😉
Being an atheist vis a vis a personal god isn't anti-agnostic, because it's self-evident. The definition of 'god' precludes 'his' existence; i.e., if god is good by definition, there can be no hell, any human suffering, or for that matter pain in ANY form. Yet there is. Therefore, a personal god cannot and does not exist.
But that doesn't mean ANY kind of 'god' doesn't exist, and I think it very well might, and might manifest itself in countless ways.
That's as far as I or any agnostic neo-deist will go.
But still, that's not an insignificant distance.
Atheists can HAVE their nearly absolute belief in non-belief. I couldn't stand thinking that way.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Yes there's some good prose in the bible.
There's also good prose outside the bible.
This proves nothing.
I think the Desiderata tops anything else ever written, for example.
It's normal to not have the answers to the Great Mysteries of life.
Once one accepts the fact at present there's no way...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 18, 2020:
@Omnedon I surmise (suppose without hard evidence) there's not only life, but intelligent life, on other planets.
Likewise, I surmise both no personal, Abrahamic god, and also a unifying, all-encompassing 'force' which accounts for the existence of the universe and gives it it's vitality.
I surmise such things as reincarnation, some paranormal activity, extraterrestials, etc., are real things. But don't KNOW.
I'm as close to KNOWING as I can be, on the other hand, there is much we don't know and may never know.
The human race is evolving, growing, learning new things every day, but some things seem out of reach. Maybe not. Who knows?😉
Being an atheist vis a vis a personal god isn't anti-agnostic, because it's self-evident. The definition of 'god' precludes 'his' existence; i.e., if god is good by definition, there can be no hell, any human suffering, or for that matter pain in ANY form. Yet there is. Therefore, a personal god cannot and does not exist.
But that doesn't mean ANY kind of 'god' doesn't exist, and I think it very well might, and might manifest itself in countless ways.
That's as far as I or any agnostic neo-deist will go.
But still, that's not an insignificant distance.
Atheists can HAVE their nearly absolute belief in non-belief. I couldn't stand thinking that way.
I am watching a very interesting and thought provoking program, "Alien Gods", available free on ...
Bierbasstard comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Pseudoarchaeology: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/09/03/what-archaeologists-really-think-about-ancient-aliens-lost-colonies-and-fingerprints-of-the-gods/#50765cd57ab0
Storm1752 replies on Mar 16, 2020:
@Bierbasstard Yes, ignorance DOES seem to be the operative word.
So Forbes is the final word on the subject, huh?
That's like saying Rush is the final word on Trump. Forbes is in the bag...ever hear of STEVE Forbes? Right-wing Prez candidate? Total basket case wingnut?
I rest my case.
The author takes the worst cases of genuine "pseudoarcheology" and cites them as indicative of the entire genre.
But Ancient Aliens is careful to weed out most of the wild, fantastic stuff and sticks to the point: the evidence is there and is compelling.
Nobody says humans couldn't have learned agriculture on their own, for example, but, to stick to the most obvious and well-known evidence--how DID the Egyptians build the Great Gaza Pyramids with mega-ton stones honed to a razor-thin tolerance?
Just for starters.
There is much, much more serious archeology extant. It can't be helped if some take that core and extropolate all kinds of things, some legit, some frankly Looney Tunes or at best not corroborated by hard evidence.
That said, examples abound of ancient structures which seem impossible to build even with today's technology.
No, this one particular piece of evidence doesn't NECESSARILY mean extraterrestials were involved (it may be unknown highly advanced super-ancient civilizations on our OWN planet are responsible).
But given the sum total of the TRUE archeology already performed, coupled with eyewitness testimony, radar sightings by such people as pilots both military and commercial, testimony of former insiders, and countless other sources (and putting the "pseudoarcheology" aside) a strong case can be made for at least taking the subject matter very seriously.
Bierbasstard comments on Mar 16, 2020:
Pseudoarchaeology: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/09/03/what-archaeologists-really-think-about-ancient-aliens-lost-colonies-and-fingerprints-of-the-gods/#50765cd57ab0
Storm1752 replies on Mar 16, 2020:
@Bierbasstard Yes, ignorance DOES seem to be the operative word.
So Forbes is the final word on the subject, huh?
That's like saying Rush is the final word on Trump. Forbes is in the bag...ever hear of STEVE Forbes? Right-wing Prez candidate? Total basket case wingnut?
I rest my case.
The author takes the worst cases of genuine "pseudoarcheology" and cites them as indicative of the entire genre.
But Ancient Aliens is careful to weed out most of the wild, fantastic stuff and sticks to the point: the evidence is there and is compelling.
Nobody says humans couldn't have learned agriculture on their own, for example, but, to stick to the most obvious and well-known evidence--how DID the Egyptians build the Great Gaza Pyramids with mega-ton stones honed to a razor-thin tolerance?
Just for starters.
There is much, much more serious archeology extant. It can't be helped if some take that core and extropolate all kinds of things, some legit, some frankly Looney Tunes or at best not corroborated by hard evidence.
That said, examples abound of ancient structures which seem impossible to build even with today's technology.
No, this one particular piece of evidence doesn't NECESSARILY mean extraterrestials were involved (it may be unknown highly advanced super-ancient civilizations on our OWN planet are responsible).
But given the sum total of the TRUE archeology already performed, coupled with eyewitness testimony, radar sightings by such people as pilots both military and commercial, testimony of former insiders, and countless other sources (and putting the "pseudoarcheology" aside) a strong case can be made for at least taking the subject matter very seriously.
Someone recently argued that greater educational attainment in first nations is the driver behind a ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 6, 2020:
No, you had it right the first time. Education leads to a decline in religiosity in most cases.
There is no "instinctual attribution of the unknown to supernatural forces," as you so laboriously put it.
What learned, erudite nonsense!
You seem to revel in using incendiary ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 16, 2020:
@Nunya Yes, but some "villages" base their ethos on superstition, falsehoods and wishful thinking, others on a combination of those fallacies and fact, and some primarily or completely on facts.
Public education is the closest we've ever come to creating a fact-based "village," but unfortunately it is now splintering into ever more narrowly-focused cult-like 'hamlets,' each a fantastic hodgepodge of fact and fiction, depending on what is convenient for them to believe in order to advance their own agendas.
So truth becomes a malleable commodity, "education" becomes a relativistic tool to be used like a weapon against other "hamlets" with competing interests, and neo-ideologies spring up based on whatever set of circumstances one wishes to selectively mold for specific purposes into a custom-made mini-ethos.
Thus a "village's," or a nation's, for that matter, ethos is lost.
I would ask you: when the educational system, the increasingly rare nuclear family, the employer, and civic groups all take their core beliefs (ethoses) from disparate sources, what happens to this supposed village? What happens to it when the educational system loses it's ability to unite this community, if you speak of it as a geographical place? When neighbors turn against neighbor? When one "nuclear family" hates the one three blocks over for being communist, or theists, or racists, or whatever? When your employer thinks contributing to your health plan is just another example of "takers" mooching off "makers?" When your church group thinks another church group is heretical or downright Satanic? When Johnny is home-schooled by survivalists, Mary goes to an Evangelical Christian school, Tasha Johnson goes to the public school with Maria Lopez, and Freddie goes to Catholic St. Mary's?
Think they will ever see eye to eye?
Some village!
Storm1752 comments on Mar 6, 2020:
No, you had it right the first time. Education leads to a decline in religiosity in most cases.
There is no "instinctual attribution of the unknown to supernatural forces," as you so laboriously put it.
What learned, erudite nonsense!
You seem to revel in using incendiary ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 16, 2020:
@Nunya Yes, but some "villages" base their ethos on superstition, falsehoods and wishful thinking, others on a combination of those fallacies and fact, and some primarily or completely on facts.
Public education is the closest we've ever come to creating a fact-based "village," but unfortunately it is now splintering into ever more narrowly-focused cult-like 'hamlets,' each a fantastic hodgepodge of fact and fiction, depending on what is convenient for them to believe in order to advance their own agendas.
So truth becomes a malleable commodity, "education" becomes a relativistic tool to be used like a weapon against other "hamlets" with competing interests, and neo-ideologies spring up based on whatever set of circumstances one wishes to selectively mold for specific purposes into a custom-made mini-ethos.
Thus a "village's," or a nation's, for that matter, ethos is lost.
I would ask you: when the educational system, the increasingly rare nuclear family, the employer, and civic groups all take their core beliefs (ethoses) from disparate sources, what happens to this supposed village? What happens to it when the educational system loses it's ability to unite this community, if you speak of it as a geographical place? When neighbors turn against neighbor? When one "nuclear family" hates the one three blocks over for being communist, or theists, or racists, or whatever? When your employer thinks contributing to your health plan is just another example of "takers" mooching off "makers?" When your church group thinks another church group is heretical or downright Satanic? When Johnny is home-schooled by survivalists, Mary goes to an Evangelical Christian school, Tasha Johnson goes to the public school with Maria Lopez, and Freddie goes to Catholic St. Mary's?
Think they will ever see eye to eye?
Some village!
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 13, 2020:
@Mcflewster Would you like to reword your last paragraph? Better yet your entire reply? As written it makes no sense.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 13, 2020:
@Mcflewster Would you like to reword your last paragraph? Better yet your entire reply? As written it makes no sense.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Mcflewster No, common sense would take science into account.
Learning there are trillions (to the umpteenth power) of stars, some which very likely harbor intelligent life, and
quantum physics teaches us there MAY be ways to transverse light years in other ways than those we are familiar with,
common sense would cause many people to surmise it may have actually been done by highly-advanced civilizations to discover those ways and use them to explore the universe.
Isn't that what WE would do if it were us?
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Mcflewster No, common sense would take science into account.
Learning there are trillions (to the umpteenth power) of stars, some which very likely harbor intelligent life, and
quantum physics teaches us there MAY be ways to transverse light years in other ways than those we are familiar with,
common sense would cause many people to surmise it may have actually been done by highly-advanced civilizations to discover those ways and use them to explore the universe.
Isn't that what WE would do if it were us?
Darwin's doubt, is evolution a theory in crises?
[youtube.com]
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
Maybe I should have posted this in academic.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
Maybe you should have thought twice about proselytizing your Christian propaganda on an agnostic site.
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
Maybe I should have posted this in academic.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
Maybe you should have thought twice about proselytizing your Christian propaganda on an agnostic site.
Darwin's doubt, is evolution a theory in crises?
[youtube.com]
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
I understand he is not well liked by many here, but he does seem to make a point. I wonder if anyone has a good intellectual argument against his position.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
The intellectual argument is that it is yet another attempt by 'Christians' to deny any and all scientific discoveries which contradict the Biblical accounts of 'Creation' and anything else.
These are the same people still looking for the ark.
The Great Flood? There MAY have been one, but not the one described in the Bible, in my opinion.
If it DID, happen, it probably occurred much earlier and obviously life itself survived and flourished.
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
I understand he is not well liked by many here, but he does seem to make a point. I wonder if anyone has a good intellectual argument against his position.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
The intellectual argument is that it is yet another attempt by 'Christians' to deny any and all scientific discoveries which contradict the Biblical accounts of 'Creation' and anything else.
These are the same people still looking for the ark.
The Great Flood? There MAY have been one, but not the one described in the Bible, in my opinion.
If it DID, happen, it probably occurred much earlier and obviously life itself survived and flourished.
Darwin's doubt, is evolution a theory in crises?
[youtube.com]
aquaheal comments on Mar 11, 2020:
https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/
On the web page I thought this was interesting.
"Despite ID’s publication record, we note parenthetically that recognition in peer-reviewed literature is not an absolute requirement to demonstrate an idea’s scientific merit. Darwin’s own theory ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
Oh, serious consideration from WHICH scientific community? You mean the minute percentage of scientists who deny the validity of an almost universally-accepted theory? THAT scientific community?
aquaheal comments on Mar 11, 2020:
https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/
On the web page I thought this was interesting.
"Despite ID’s publication record, we note parenthetically that recognition in peer-reviewed literature is not an absolute requirement to demonstrate an idea’s scientific merit. Darwin’s own theory ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
Oh, serious consideration from WHICH scientific community? You mean the minute percentage of scientists who deny the validity of an almost universally-accepted theory? THAT scientific community?
Darwin's doubt, is evolution a theory in crises?
[youtube.com]
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Evolution does not try to explain the origins of life, but simply how that life develops and evolves over time. So his first premise is fallacious right out of the gate.
'Materislistic world view?' What does THAT really mean? Everybody dislikes materialism, right?
The Cambrian explosion does not ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@aquaheal Yes, so when he uses the word, "materialism," he's being too clever by half.
Sure, it speaks to the atheistic world view (I'm agnostic and not sympathetic to materialistic atheism, of which we have PLENTY on this site).
It also is used in the sense "physical comfort is more important than spiritual values," and I find that obnoxiously condenscending.
This man, and the scientists he so authoritatively cites, knows very little or nothing about the mechanics of this epoch, how and why it unfolded the way it did.
Like all bible-thumpers, he simply uses it as a prop to bash non-Christians, which he views as NON-SPIRITUAL and only interested in material things.
Now I, and people like me (not materialistic atheists, who scoff at anything they can't 'prove'), care much more about the mysteries of life than most 'Christians,' who also think they've figured out everything of any importance.
Like atheists, they have shut out of their minds anything which doesn't fit their neatly packaged, prejudged certainty about existence. Which is extremely limited, simplistic, and ridiculously erroneous in many details.
Instead of puzzling in amazement at how the natural world can reach a tipping point and then suddenly explode into it's 'finished,' yet constantly evolving, 'adult' state (like a dragonfly suddenly emerging from it's long larval stage into magnificent adulthood), people like this guy uses it as a battering ram to excorciate anyone who doesn't think exactly like him.
He should get down on his hands and knees and ask for forgiveness not from his fictitious 'god,' but from all the well-meaning people--educated, intelligent, thinking, searching, wondering, 'spiritual'--he slanders.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Evolution does not try to explain the origins of life, but simply how that life develops and evolves over time. So his first premise is fallacious right out of the gate.
'Materislistic world view?' What does THAT really mean? Everybody dislikes materialism, right?
The Cambrian explosion does not ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@aquaheal Yes, so when he uses the word, "materialism," he's being too clever by half.
Sure, it speaks to the atheistic world view (I'm agnostic and not sympathetic to materialistic atheism, of which we have PLENTY on this site).
It also is used in the sense "physical comfort is more important than spiritual values," and I find that obnoxiously condenscending.
This man, and the scientists he so authoritatively cites, knows very little or nothing about the mechanics of this epoch, how and why it unfolded the way it did.
Like all bible-thumpers, he simply uses it as a prop to bash non-Christians, which he views as NON-SPIRITUAL and only interested in material things.
Now I, and people like me (not materialistic atheists, who scoff at anything they can't 'prove'), care much more about the mysteries of life than most 'Christians,' who also think they've figured out everything of any importance.
Like atheists, they have shut out of their minds anything which doesn't fit their neatly packaged, prejudged certainty about existence. Which is extremely limited, simplistic, and ridiculously erroneous in many details.
Instead of puzzling in amazement at how the natural world can reach a tipping point and then suddenly explode into it's 'finished,' yet constantly evolving, 'adult' state (like a dragonfly suddenly emerging from it's long larval stage into magnificent adulthood), people like this guy uses it as a battering ram to excorciate anyone who doesn't think exactly like him.
He should get down on his hands and knees and ask for forgiveness not from his fictitious 'god,' but from all the well-meaning people--educated, intelligent, thinking, searching, wondering, 'spiritual'--he slanders.
Good morning and happy hump day!
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Wednesday is a nondescript nothing of a day, if you ask me.
Nothing interesting happens on a Wednesday.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Wildflower Trying to be humorous, but there's some truth to it. In the panoply of days, Saturday and Sunday reign supreme. Next comes Friday, of course, payday, the anticipation of a well-funded weekend. Thursday is in anticipation of Friday.
Monday is the villain of the week, and Tuesday's not much better.
Which leaves us with Wednesday....poor, misbegotten, forgotten, underachieving Wednesday....just...'a day:' nothing special, of no import, just to be gotten through on our way to Thursday, when things finally start to perk up.
No, sorry, it's an unappreciated 24 hours of which nothing special--good OR bad--can be said.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Wednesday is a nondescript nothing of a day, if you ask me.
Nothing interesting happens on a Wednesday.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Wildflower Trying to be humorous, but there's some truth to it. In the panoply of days, Saturday and Sunday reign supreme. Next comes Friday, of course, payday, the anticipation of a well-funded weekend. Thursday is in anticipation of Friday.
Monday is the villain of the week, and Tuesday's not much better.
Which leaves us with Wednesday....poor, misbegotten, forgotten, underachieving Wednesday....just...'a day:' nothing special, of no import, just to be gotten through on our way to Thursday, when things finally start to perk up.
No, sorry, it's an unappreciated 24 hours of which nothing special--good OR bad--can be said.
Breaking news : Harvey Weinstein is sentenced to 23 years! Woohoo! Is it enough?
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
He's a scapegoat for every man who's done something like that and those men are legion.
I can't help but think we're missing something here.
If it's such a common occurrence, why?
Why are so many men behaving this way?
Can anything be done to stop it, or is this just the way things are?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty No of course not. Maybe that's the wrong word.
Patsy?
What I mean is, he's an easy one to blame for the faults and misdeeds of a whole group of people, INCLUDING HIMSELF.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
He's a scapegoat for every man who's done something like that and those men are legion.
I can't help but think we're missing something here.
If it's such a common occurrence, why?
Why are so many men behaving this way?
Can anything be done to stop it, or is this just the way things are?
Storm1752 replies on Mar 12, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty No of course not. Maybe that's the wrong word.
Patsy?
What I mean is, he's an easy one to blame for the faults and misdeeds of a whole group of people, INCLUDING HIMSELF.
Darwin's doubt, is evolution a theory in crises?
[youtube.com]
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
Maybe I should have posted this in academic.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
I'm willing to admit the Cambrian explosion is a bit mysterious, but so is life itself.
aquaheal comments on Mar 10, 2020:
Maybe I should have posted this in academic.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
I'm willing to admit the Cambrian explosion is a bit mysterious, but so is life itself.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Word comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Jesus style god is/was made in because of what was spoken. Spoken words with kinetic energy force of intellectual capabilities.
Important to point out translation of origional greek Pnuema into spirit. The Hebrew word ruach is the word of old testiment.
English word spirit often has a ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
Fred the Apostle.
Word comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Jesus style god is/was made in because of what was spoken. Spoken words with kinetic energy force of intellectual capabilities.
Important to point out translation of origional greek Pnuema into spirit. The Hebrew word ruach is the word of old testiment.
English word spirit often has a ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
Fred the Apostle.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
GeorgeRocheleau comments on Mar 11, 2020:
The theory was most famously put forth by Erich von Däniken. Most of his examples were shown to be misrepresentations or outright frauds. There is no credible evidence that extraterrestrials have ever visited earth.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
You're wrong.
There's plenty of very convincing circumstantial evidence which would at the very least give one pause to think seriously about the possibility.
GeorgeRocheleau comments on Mar 11, 2020:
The theory was most famously put forth by Erich von Däniken. Most of his examples were shown to be misrepresentations or outright frauds. There is no credible evidence that extraterrestrials have ever visited earth.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
You're wrong.
There's plenty of very convincing circumstantial evidence which would at the very least give one pause to think seriously about the possibility.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Mcflewster Common sense applied to what we DO know is called an 'educated guess,' or, in scientific terms, a hypothesis.
Of course it'd be misleading to make a 'leap of faith' and jump to conclusions. I and people like me are doing no such thing.
You and people like you ARE jumping to conclusions, based on nothing more than your own prejudgments.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Mcflewster Common sense applied to what we DO know is called an 'educated guess,' or, in scientific terms, a hypothesis.
Of course it'd be misleading to make a 'leap of faith' and jump to conclusions. I and people like me are doing no such thing.
You and people like you ARE jumping to conclusions, based on nothing more than your own prejudgments.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Davesnothere comments on Mar 11, 2020:
There are a great many anomalies in ancient history, things we simply do not understand. The problem is these notions are all subjective, that is we try to make sense of them from OUR world view, which includes space aliens and lost civilizations. The ancients themselves knew their import, we do ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
Just because we (very limited) human beings hypothesize an explanation doesn't mean we BELIEVE it; just that it's plausible.
What I take exception to is the knee-jerk dismissal of even the possibility.
If someone has a counter-hypothesis, or simply says, 'I don't know and don't care,' fine.
But to equate belief in a 'god' for which there is no evidence, with the stark reality of these ancient structures and cave drawings, etc., innumerable eye witness testimonials, the unexplained sonar and radar detections, and other phenomena, and just dismiss it all out of hand as nonsense, exposes the dismisser as a close-minded person, period.
I, though, do not confuse obstinance with intelligence.
According to Einsteinian quantum physics it is possible to imagine inter- and/or intra-dimensional travel, or through 'wormholes, or by some other means about which we don't yet know.
A highly advanced civilization WOULD know more about these things, common sense tells me.
We are discovering planets with the theoretical existence of intelligent life; many people already think it's absurd to think such planets do not exist.
How far-fetched IS it, then, to postulate we are being visited by extraterrestials who for whatever reason, wish not to reveal themselves at this time.
As with everything else, I'm agnostic. I'm not necessarily convinced, but I'm not prepared to say, 'No way, no how.'
That these people are flippantly scornful of the very thought tells me much more about them than the subject at hand.
Davesnothere comments on Mar 11, 2020:
There are a great many anomalies in ancient history, things we simply do not understand. The problem is these notions are all subjective, that is we try to make sense of them from OUR world view, which includes space aliens and lost civilizations. The ancients themselves knew their import, we do ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
Just because we (very limited) human beings hypothesize an explanation doesn't mean we BELIEVE it; just that it's plausible.
What I take exception to is the knee-jerk dismissal of even the possibility.
If someone has a counter-hypothesis, or simply says, 'I don't know and don't care,' fine.
But to equate belief in a 'god' for which there is no evidence, with the stark reality of these ancient structures and cave drawings, etc., innumerable eye witness testimonials, the unexplained sonar and radar detections, and other phenomena, and just dismiss it all out of hand as nonsense, exposes the dismisser as a close-minded person, period.
I, though, do not confuse obstinance with intelligence.
According to Einsteinian quantum physics it is possible to imagine inter- and/or intra-dimensional travel, or through 'wormholes, or by some other means about which we don't yet know.
A highly advanced civilization WOULD know more about these things, common sense tells me.
We are discovering planets with the theoretical existence of intelligent life; many people already think it's absurd to think such planets do not exist.
How far-fetched IS it, then, to postulate we are being visited by extraterrestials who for whatever reason, wish not to reveal themselves at this time.
As with everything else, I'm agnostic. I'm not necessarily convinced, but I'm not prepared to say, 'No way, no how.'
That these people are flippantly scornful of the very thought tells me much more about them than the subject at hand.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Fernapple, @Mcflewster Not the point. Sometimes it takes common sense, a little scholarship, sophisticated equipment and instruments, and thorough scientific investigation, to approach anything approaching the truth.
Superficial nay-saying, on the other hand, is easy.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Fernapple, @Mcflewster Not the point. Sometimes it takes common sense, a little scholarship, sophisticated equipment and instruments, and thorough scientific investigation, to approach anything approaching the truth.
Superficial nay-saying, on the other hand, is easy.
Okay, I was talking with a friend yesterday.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Fernapple That's 'reactionary NON-believer,' to you.
Just as a homework assignment, read about and try to explain how they built the pyramids, to take one glaring and obvious example, the stones honed to within 1/100-inch tolerance, without modern equipment.
Or how pre-Ice Age civilizations are underwater in oceans all over the world, or how a 15th Century cartographer knew the geographic details of Antarctica when it's three miles under ice.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 11, 2020:
Ancient Aliens on the History Channel is good. It sometimes gets wildly speculative, but for the most part it is factual and very convincing.
Some people ignorantly mislabel the entire subject as "fake," but they obviously have never delved into it personally, and have no idea what they're talking ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@Fernapple That's 'reactionary NON-believer,' to you.
Just as a homework assignment, read about and try to explain how they built the pyramids, to take one glaring and obvious example, the stones honed to within 1/100-inch tolerance, without modern equipment.
Or how pre-Ice Age civilizations are underwater in oceans all over the world, or how a 15th Century cartographer knew the geographic details of Antarctica when it's three miles under ice.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@skado It seems like their "divide and conquer" tactics are bearing fruit.
You actually think your all-or-nothing, politically purist, ideologically simplistic politics are helpful?
Either that, or you know they are not, and are deliberately sowing seeds of discord to undermine whatever feeble resistance to the "vast right-wing conspiracy" yet remain.
People like Hillary Cinton and Nancy Pelosi are not the enemy. When you say you'll no longer support them, calling them the "establishment," you are thereby and by default supporting those who you claim are your enemies.
It's hard to tell where your loyalties lie, actually.
Who, then, DO you plan to support? If Bernie loses (not at all certain, and I plan to vote for him in our upcoming primary), do you plan to encourage an independent candidacy? I think I already know the answer to that one.
Failing that, throw your support to some doomed third-party bid or, just as likely, stay home on election day?
If yes to any of the these three options, you are playing right into the hands of the anti-democratic, radically reactionary, libertarian forces which threaten to disenfranchise common, ordinary people.
We will all be, literally and figuratively, much poorer for it.
Rather than reject anything less than perfection, I'd accept what is possible, a half-full glass of watered-down but still palatable wine.
I'd work to, and argue for ways to, improve our discourse, rather than abort the whole thing. After all, even though I'm sure you're pro-choice, you must want to save THIS particular baby, don't you? Or does it go out with the bath water?
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@skado It seems like their "divide and conquer" tactics are bearing fruit.
You actually think your all-or-nothing, politically purist, ideologically simplistic politics are helpful?
Either that, or you know they are not, and are deliberately sowing seeds of discord to undermine whatever feeble resistance to the "vast right-wing conspiracy" yet remain.
People like Hillary Cinton and Nancy Pelosi are not the enemy. When you say you'll no longer support them, calling them the "establishment," you are thereby and by default supporting those who you claim are your enemies.
It's hard to tell where your loyalties lie, actually.
Who, then, DO you plan to support? If Bernie loses (not at all certain, and I plan to vote for him in our upcoming primary), do you plan to encourage an independent candidacy? I think I already know the answer to that one.
Failing that, throw your support to some doomed third-party bid or, just as likely, stay home on election day?
If yes to any of the these three options, you are playing right into the hands of the anti-democratic, radically reactionary, libertarian forces which threaten to disenfranchise common, ordinary people.
We will all be, literally and figuratively, much poorer for it.
Rather than reject anything less than perfection, I'd accept what is possible, a half-full glass of watered-down but still palatable wine.
I'd work to, and argue for ways to, improve our discourse, rather than abort the whole thing. After all, even though I'm sure you're pro-choice, you must want to save THIS particular baby, don't you? Or does it go out with the bath water?
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@skado I've said all I want to say on the matter, for the time being.
You are either deliberately obtuse, or demented with impotent, unreasoning rage.
Either way, I tire of your sophistry.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 11, 2020:
@skado I've said all I want to say on the matter, for the time being.
You are either deliberately obtuse, or demented with impotent, unreasoning rage.
Either way, I tire of your sophistry.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@skado Forgive me if I being hopelessly uninformed or naive, but I'm guessing because Hillary got more votes?
I think she would've been a good president. So would've Joe Biden. Or Sanders.
The problem is not with the presidential candidates per se; it's we:re getting our -sses kicked all the way up and down the ticket because Pubs lie shamelessly and rely on talk radio to drum those lies into medocre minds.
We're not losing the ideas battle; it's just that corporations took over the AM dial and, after Reagan scuttled the Fairness Doctrine, shut out divergent points of view. Obama had a chance to reverse that, but inexplicitly did not.
We we're tricked, lied to, and outmanuevered into ceding to the monied classes the levers of power, especially free speech.
Hopefully another chance will come.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@skado Forgive me if I being hopelessly uninformed or naive, but I'm guessing because Hillary got more votes?
I think she would've been a good president. So would've Joe Biden. Or Sanders.
The problem is not with the presidential candidates per se; it's we:re getting our -sses kicked all the way up and down the ticket because Pubs lie shamelessly and rely on talk radio to drum those lies into medocre minds.
We're not losing the ideas battle; it's just that corporations took over the AM dial and, after Reagan scuttled the Fairness Doctrine, shut out divergent points of view. Obama had a chance to reverse that, but inexplicitly did not.
We we're tricked, lied to, and outmanuevered into ceding to the monied classes the levers of power, especially free speech.
Hopefully another chance will come.
As I respect the level 'Agnostic' sits on, I wonder, whom could challenge or logically deny that ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 5, 2020:
I'd go along with that word, except I've made up my OWN definition of god as being some sort of 'universal consciousness,' or, more precisely, 'something in the Neo-Deist vein.'
I consider MY definition superior to all others so, in my own opinion, I myself am possessed of superior judgment and ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@AnTwanSr Ummm....I'm using the word 'god' as a reference point, but since the word itself comes with so much baggage it's hopelessly tainted. 'God' automatically conjures up images of an identifiable personal deity, and that:s not what I mean by the word at all. In fact, I've very little idea what I DO mean, except there may be a 'collectove unconscious,' or something. There definitely seems to be a mathematical order to things, there are many mysterious things about life which defy explanation.
But what IS it? Who knows?
So even discussing the existence of said 'god' is absurd...we have no idea what we're talking about, literally.
All I CAN say is, whatever IT is (or is not), it may or may not exist!
But I lean toward the position IT does.
How absurd is that?
(I was obviously joking about my 'superior intellect,' btw.).
Storm1752 comments on Mar 5, 2020:
I'd go along with that word, except I've made up my OWN definition of god as being some sort of 'universal consciousness,' or, more precisely, 'something in the Neo-Deist vein.'
I consider MY definition superior to all others so, in my own opinion, I myself am possessed of superior judgment and ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@AnTwanSr Ummm....I'm using the word 'god' as a reference point, but since the word itself comes with so much baggage it's hopelessly tainted. 'God' automatically conjures up images of an identifiable personal deity, and that:s not what I mean by the word at all. In fact, I've very little idea what I DO mean, except there may be a 'collectove unconscious,' or something. There definitely seems to be a mathematical order to things, there are many mysterious things about life which defy explanation.
But what IS it? Who knows?
So even discussing the existence of said 'god' is absurd...we have no idea what we're talking about, literally.
All I CAN say is, whatever IT is (or is not), it may or may not exist!
But I lean toward the position IT does.
How absurd is that?
(I was obviously joking about my 'superior intellect,' btw.).
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Sticks48 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
There is a great deal of difference between the two parties. Because you don't agree with either party does not mean there is no difference between the two. Supreme Court appointees is the most significant difference with the longest lasting consequences. Show me a country, Kingdom, or Empire of ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
THANK you!
I'm stunned by these people's complete ignorance.
Sticks48 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
There is a great deal of difference between the two parties. Because you don't agree with either party does not mean there is no difference between the two. Supreme Court appointees is the most significant difference with the longest lasting consequences. Show me a country, Kingdom, or Empire of ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
THANK you!
I'm stunned by these people's complete ignorance.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
TomMcGiverin comments on Mar 8, 2020:
Outside of identity politics, there is little difference between the two major US parties. Someone on here even posted a list of the identical positions of the two parties. It filled a whole page.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
They are superficial differences.
TomMcGiverin comments on Mar 8, 2020:
Outside of identity politics, there is little difference between the two major US parties. Someone on here even posted a list of the identical positions of the two parties. It filled a whole page.
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
They are superficial differences.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@IRatherMove Oh? And what do YOU know, really, about, say, French politics.
Besides, you're not from some foreign country.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@IRatherMove Oh? And what do YOU know, really, about, say, French politics.
Besides, you're not from some foreign country.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@IRatherMove, @RoboGraham Baloney.
Very little of what you said is true, other than the Dems have been forced back into the rich-donor game just to compete. Unless you're Nader or Sanders (two heroes of mine, whom I voted for even though they had and have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected).
Dems didn't get us into Vietnam, Iraq, or any other recent war.
They didn't start the 'drug war' and are far more interested in decriminalization and rehabilitation, needle-exchange programs, counseling, education, etc.
They're for progressive tax policies, higher taxes on the rich and corporations, redistribution of wealth in general, and well-funded government agencies devoted to ordinary people.
They do NOT believe in trickle-down economics! Where did you get THAT idea? That's the brainchild of David Stockman back in the Reagan years.
They are TOTALLY against voter suppression!
Where are you getting your fake ideas, Fox News?
You are so far off the mark it's ridiculous to even talk about it with you.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@IRatherMove, @RoboGraham Baloney.
Very little of what you said is true, other than the Dems have been forced back into the rich-donor game just to compete. Unless you're Nader or Sanders (two heroes of mine, whom I voted for even though they had and have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected).
Dems didn't get us into Vietnam, Iraq, or any other recent war.
They didn't start the 'drug war' and are far more interested in decriminalization and rehabilitation, needle-exchange programs, counseling, education, etc.
They're for progressive tax policies, higher taxes on the rich and corporations, redistribution of wealth in general, and well-funded government agencies devoted to ordinary people.
They do NOT believe in trickle-down economics! Where did you get THAT idea? That's the brainchild of David Stockman back in the Reagan years.
They are TOTALLY against voter suppression!
Where are you getting your fake ideas, Fox News?
You are so far off the mark it's ridiculous to even talk about it with you.
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@skado That is sooo unjustifiably cynical. Is that how you rationalize not voting?
It's been a long time since radical conservatives took over government, not long after Reagan got elected, and things have been going steadily downhill ever since.
Maybe your memory is failing or you're not old enough, but this USED to be a fairly progressive country.
Now it's an utter disaster.
Explain that to me, other than the Pubs have turned it over to the corporations and the super rich. And don't try saying the liberals have had anything to do with it, because they've been totally defeated and roundly stomped on.
Why? Because of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" Hillary talks about; the relatively poor vote on guns, abortion and gays, the rich for ever more tax breaks, and the government, OUR government, is being bled dry.
Don't TELL me there's no difference! It's a lie!
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 9, 2020:
@skado That is sooo unjustifiably cynical. Is that how you rationalize not voting?
It's been a long time since radical conservatives took over government, not long after Reagan got elected, and things have been going steadily downhill ever since.
Maybe your memory is failing or you're not old enough, but this USED to be a fairly progressive country.
Now it's an utter disaster.
Explain that to me, other than the Pubs have turned it over to the corporations and the super rich. And don't try saying the liberals have had anything to do with it, because they've been totally defeated and roundly stomped on.
Why? Because of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" Hillary talks about; the relatively poor vote on guns, abortion and gays, the rich for ever more tax breaks, and the government, OUR government, is being bled dry.
Don't TELL me there's no difference! It's a lie!
“There are few substantial differences between the two ruling political parties in the United ...
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 8, 2020:
@skado SUBSTANTIAL differences: there are very, very many, on virtually every conceivable issue.
Storm1752 comments on Mar 8, 2020:
As an earlier replier said, it's utter nonsense to say there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs.
C'mon! Name some issues--let alone a whole page worth of them--they have positions in common.
Oh sure, if you say 'balancing the budget,' they're both for it, of course, but HOW they'd do it ...
Storm1752 replies on Mar 8, 2020:
@skado SUBSTANTIAL differences: there are very, very many, on virtually every conceivable issue.
Photos
Details
Agnostic, Humanist, Secularist, Skeptic, Freethinker
Open to meeting women - BirthdayNovember 17
- Interested InFriends
- EnjoysMovies, Food, Music, Science, Books, Outdoors, Sports, Art, Love, Sex, Theater, Travel
- EducationGrad School
- Top tags#god #agnostic #atheism #republicans #world #religion #DonaldTrump #Atheist #vote #government #reason #hope #democrats #Jesus #truth #sex #religious #hell #belief #laws
- Level8 (69,676pts)
- Followers 21
- Fans 0
- Following 30
- Fav. Posts 2
- Referrals1
- Joined Jul 19th, 2018
-
Last Visit
Over a year ago
Not in search results
Storm1752's Groups
Common Ground
55 members, Host
Topic of the day
94422 members
Just for Laughs
3327 members
Memes R Us
3033 members
FreeThinkers
2691 members
Quotes
2151 members
Introverts Unite!
2011 members
Out Of The Illusion
1732 members
50s +
1670 members
Singles/Mingle/Chat
1651 members
Music Fans
1283 members
Trump Pinata
1141 members
Human Sexuality: Everything About It
1017 members
Sexy Classy Pics
774 members
Sex, Drugs, Rock and Roll
641 members
Mental Health Support
631 members
Music of the Movies
508 members
Uncommon words and their meanings.
504 members
Movie Lovers
475 members
Florida Freethinkers
444 members
Science, Health & History Tidbits
419 members
CLASSIC ROCK RULES
388 members
Dating for Real People
370 members
Liberal/Progressive Party
304 members
P.A.T.C.H. People Against The Christian Hypocrites
294 members
Jokes and humor about religion
279 members
36 Questions
247 members
SapioSexuals
247 members
The Best of Late Night & News
202 members
Simple Thoughts
194 members
Non-nude sexy pics
191 members
Sun Moon Stars
150 members
Biden 2020
141 members
American Humanists Association
135 members
Dharma Café
133 members
EROTICA/EROTIC STORIES
122 members
L7new
103 members
Religious Naturalism
96 members
All Things Asia
82 members
Feminist Atheists
44 members
Illogical atheists guide for ending Christianity
38 members
Ask Males ANYthing
37 members
Origins of Heaven and Hell
33 members
Elon Musk
30 members
UAPs, UFOs, USOs and 1st Contact
29 members
Consortium of thoughts
20 members
Broken Hearts Club
18 members
Taboo Island Atlantis
15 members
Community Senate
385 members