zedvictor4

The idea is the innovation.

You just seem to not like the personality for some reason.

I know very little about him.

But he seems to get things done.

And "paying" is perhaps one of the biggest obstacles that stands in the way of progress. 

Great song. BK.

I'm the anti-tank missile man.

Who cooks the brave tankmen.

Inside their trundling saucepans.

Alive alive ho oh.

Alive alive ho.

I'm the droneman.

That sits in his office

Over the seas and far away

Alive alive ho oh

Alive alive ho.

Neither brave nor courageous.

Just a day at the office.

Then I'll pop home for tea.

Alive alive ho oh 

Alive alive ho.

Do you mean dumb?

Or do you mean dumb?

Or do you mean both, as a result of inbreeding in the swamps and backwoods?

He's an innovator.

And I would suggest that innovators are "useful" for the future, and do not necessarily need to concern themselves with ongoing social issues.

Which isn't to say that they don't.

Actually I would suggest that innovators are a necessity, rather than just plain useful.

Yep.

Hopefully politicians who lead the "Free World", are also diplomats.

And racist is your word.

I prefer discriminatory.

How one responds outwardly to internal discrimination is the key to diplomacy. Both at a home and abroad.

And weaving is what people do on looms.

Words hey.

As for your last paragraph.

Deistic belief and theo-speak is indicative of your conditioning.

Just as my words are indicative of me.

Though out of tradition, some guy  did splash water on my head when I was a few moths old.

And Religion was compulsory at infant school.

Nonetheless, with my Dad's assistance, I came to my own conclusions. HaHa.

And are religious prophets, charlatans?

Hey, your free to choose.

Though in the end, if there is a GOD, I bet it's very logical and sensible.

And not the crazy discriminatory being, as described by prophets.

They proposed the theory of GOD and Heaven

They said their prayers and pulled the trigger.

Now.

Did they overthink the theory wisely.

Or underthink the possible consequences of overthinking the theory.

Have a great day Deb.

And watch out for Kangaroos.

I will reply in full later.

But one thing I would point out is:

Recorded civilisation can only be as recorded if civilisation can be recorded.

Racism is broadly defined.

From normal instinctive discrimination to overtly aggressive discrimination.

So please be more specific.

It could be said that all governmental policies that are designed to bring about social order or a change in social order, are based upon some level of discrimination.

So for example, the immigration policies of any government that seeks to protect a nations established sovereignty and assets, are based upon discrimination.

Wasn't it George Dubya who signed the Secure Fence Act?

Well, it's clear that you base you reasoning upon a religious precept.

So it must be pointed out that just like the modifiable relationship, religion is no more or less a human social construct.

And lust, can be used to describe any necessary response to procreational drive, heterosexual, homosexual, masturbation or other.

And the success of the "tribe" is reliant upon the fecundity of it's members.

And within a modern context,  the modifiable relationship does not seem to affect either fecundity or the willingness to procreate.

But let's be logical and also say that from a truly deistic point of view there would only be one tribe...Namely the Human tribe.

And whether or not it was "placed" here by a deity is another contentious issue.

As is, what such a deity might actually think...It would be a tad arrogant to assume that we knew what it's thoughts were.

For sure, out of the number of appropriate brains that are available at any given time, it would perhaps be possible to programme most if not all with the relevant data.

But I do have my doubts about this... I'm not sure that all normally functioning brains do possess the same capability or desire.

Though teaching the masses how to utilise techno-innovations is not really what I'm driving at.

How many will have the ability to expand upon old data and create new...You cannot teach/programme a brain if the relevant data does not yet exist.

I would suggest that the ratio of innovator capability to user ability is very low.

One in thousands maybe, or even one in millions?

Yep, I cannot refute that either.

Material evolution has been slow.

Though seemingly, material manipulation and development at the hands of humans is somewhat exponential.

In this context, intelligence is all about the ability to acquire, store and utilise information.

So in terms of colonising elsewhere, relative to 300000years of evolution, I would suggest that we will be getting there sooner rather than later.

100 years or 500, unfortunately we won't be around to find out.

Answer me this though.

Billions of people have learned how to utilise smartphones, but how many of those billions know how the technology works?

And how many out of 8billion and counting, will ever understand genetic engineering?

Yep, I cannot refute any of that.

I tend to speculate about the long term.

And how long is a piece of string.

Though it cannot be argued that intelligence and sexuality are not evolving factors of the human species.

Similarly genetic engineering, although in it's infancy, will also inevitably evolve.

As will the colonisation of elsewhere.

Why colonise space with numpties?

Wouldn't that be a backward step?

Yep.

Raspberries grow wild in the woods here in Wales...Similarly blackberries.

Very few people pick them. I do.

Black/red/white currants and gooseberries also very easy to produce.

Elderberries also grow wild in abundance and make excellent syrup.

Elderflowers also make an excellent summer cordial and wine.

Also an abundance of wild strawberries, though they are very small, so I grow cultivated varieties.

Wild damsons and hedgerow plums abound.

Keep up the good work BK.

Social trend relative to human social evolution relative to ongoing socio-psychological angst.

Bloke = sperm producer

Woman = egg producer.

Bloke that has their dick and balls removed = just that.

Women that wear strap-ons = just that.

If you wish to construe the phrase over-replenished as meaning the same as over-populated, then that is entirely up to you.

Though over-replenished was simply a response to your concerns of human replenishment.

And homosexual relationships are obviously not heterosexual relationships.

Though homosexual relationships do not necessarily diminish fecundity or procreational desires.

Gay and Lesbian couples are very proficient at raising families.

You are confusing procreational sex and recreational sex.

Relationships are a human social construct, and therefore modifiable, whether you like it or not.

For sure.

For as long as sexuality remains inbred it will remain as a primary instinctive urge.

So genetic modification would be a solution to this.

Not that any of this is going to happen tomorrow.

As I always point out, it's taken approximately 300000 years to get this far.

Though to secure the long term future of humanity, it would only be necessary to breed a limited colony of super-intellectual, asexual humans.

Somewhere else perhaps.

There's a difference between government policies and an individuals acquired propensity to discriminate.

Which is why I asked previously, who do you think actually run's the USA.

Sociology is a broad subject.

So a very brief two line response to your second question.

Natural hierarchy dictates social order, so originally a pecking order within the troop would have naturally evolved.

Money and other tokens of value would have come much later, as intellect developed and populations grew.

Sounds like the title of a song from the musical, Washington.

Yes they did.

They ignored the fact.

No they didn't.

And currency is a necessary tool that dictates social order.

And technological data sources certainly affect current thinking.

Future populations on Planet Earth are some what irrelevant in terms of material evolution. (This is a generalisation)

And your concerns seem to focus mainly on human sexual and procreative acts.

Sexual acts simply relieve urges, just as they have always done.

And procreation no longer relies upon male/female copulation...Other methodology has evolved as intellect and knowledge has evolved.

As I often suggest:

Asexuality and selective breeding is perhaps the direction in which humanity is heading.

One might also speculate that this is the way that universal events are meant to go.

LOL.

You sound like my Dad.

Not that I'm not starting to sound like my Dad.

Homosexual acts are not intended to result in procreation, and I never suggested that they were.

Homosexual acts are a long establish method of relieving and enjoying procreational urges.

Acts that certainly predate Christianity by many thousands of years.

Neither did I suggest that 8.1 billion is indicative of over-population.

It was you that suggested that homosexuality might affect the replenishment of the Earth.

Which it clearly doesn't.

And education is as education does.

All formative education is brainwashing to a degree, irrespective of whether one chooses to label  incoming data and it's provider/s as either left, right or central.

And you think that the phrase "constructs of satanism " is not "nonsense".

Such is indicative of how your database was conditioned.

As I stated, most people just go with the flow and the bullshit, and never bother to give it a second thought.

We already do.

Though we haven't yet streamlined the process.

I'm guessing that it will just naturally streamline itself, in response to evolutionary requirements...Such as escaping Planet Earth.

8.1 billion and counting.

The Earth is well over-replenished.

And if homosexuality is a mental change then so are smartphones and computer games.

Nope, homosexuality is just an intellectually adapted recreational form of procreative activity.

Just as smartphones are an intellectually adapted means of data transfer.

Q. And how do you know what normal is?

A. Because everything is normal.

Everything that occurs within a universe at any given moment is naturally occurring.

And that includes believing in biblical tales and magical floaty about blokes

Sounds OK.

But I regulate my meat intake, especially processed meats like salami, ham or bacon.

In fact I rarely eat processed meat these days.

Anchovies are just small strips of salted fish and are very tasty.

Ear drums detect vibrations.

Brains create noise.

We're slaves to material evolution.

And in terms of the evolution of species, this certainly includes the development of money as a controlling  influence.

After all we are just thinking, manipulative  organic blobs, who's purpose if any, seems to be the furtherment of material evolution.

Certain sexual acts are collectively considered to be anti-social and  are outlawed.

These sorts of acts will attract descriptive  labels appropriate with their appointed status.

Just as homosexual acts once did.

Well currently that seems to be the only answer.

But doesn't resolve the something from nothing conundrum.

Though if matter and energy have always existed, why would intelligent structures not have evolved of their own accord.

And why did they not evolve billions of years ago?...(Perhaps they did in previous universes).

OK. So an evolved super-intelligence, created intelligent humans...But why?

Wouldn't an evolved super-intelligence have furthered material evolution by creating  technological intelligence, as we are now doing.

Perhaps we are  the evolved universal super-intelligence...(In this universe).

Not so long ago, decapitating a head with an axe was a popular form of public entertainment in the UK.

And Madame Guillotine certainly got the French buzzing with excitement.

In fact, I think that a good beheading sill fills stadiums in some places.

For sure, another superior intelligence would exist in another realm..."Spiritual" is just a human descriptive.

And for sure also, we may or may not be resultant of another superior intelligences design.

Though the problem that I have with an intelligent designer, is with the design of the intelligent designer.

(All attempts at resolving the question of material existence, fall down at an absolute beginning).

If the intelligent human required an intelligent designer, then so did the intelligent designer.

Otherwise, if the intelligent designer didn't require an intelligent designer, then nor did the human.

In short.

Responses are conditioned.

So if one is conditioned to think that A is worse than B, then one will generally default to that position.

Legal and consensual constraints accepted, I personally do not consider any act of sexual congress disgusting.

Rather, just a choice made by consenting individuals.

Even in cases of illegal and non-consensual acts I would not default to a position of "disgust"...Such is my conditioning.

Where does "disgust" comes on a general scale of reference?

Sort of, just before repulsive and quite a way after nice.

Homosexuality is simply an act of sexual congress between two males.

In response we generate variable mental palaver.

Religion is also a variety of mental palaver.

And then, clean up.

Roll over and go to sleep.

Until the next time.

In between times there's a whole lot of other stuff to be doing.

Funny how we like to concentrate on brief episodes of mutual ejaculation.

It's also indicative of a niche or pocket of up-treading circumstances.

So a hundred years or so from now, who will be the slave and what will be the master?

Here I am.

I took your advice and I'm here to discuss the Jesuit significance of crosses.

So, I buy a plain cheese and tomato base from Aldi, and top it with mushrooms, red peppers, black olives and anchovies.

If you think about how the human computer converts incoming signals into discernible data...The human realm is therefore self contained and self generating.

And undoubtedly we can generate a sense of spirituality or a spirit realm as you refer to it, in response to both incoming and self-generated data.

So in terms of internal electro-chemical processes, a spirit realm is real and believable.

Though this realm occurs inside your brain.

Not outside.

Vibrating air molecules is not a problem.

But without ears and brain there is no noise.

All that you have is vibrating air molecules.

Other systems may also detect vibrating air molecules, but Ebuc still needs his own auditory system to convert their signals into noise.

One can believe anything.

Because belief is no guarantee of anything.

Consciousness and therefore awareness, rely upon a consciously functioning system.

Has residual energy ever been verifiably detected leaving a dead body?

Though a scary idea which actually sounds quite feasible, is that the human consciousness could be downloaded to an alternative system.

But how is this directly connected to the contentious creator GOD hypothesis.

The only way to reconcile the creator GOD hypothesis, is to contradict the necessity of the creation, by asserting that a creator does not require creating.

In which case, it is implied that creation is not a necessary requirement.

Therefore inferring that a creator is also not to be a necessary requirement.

I think that ghosts are still popular.

Spirituality like any other theory or pseudo theory, simply relies upon a complex brain having the desire to create it.

Species may have developed varying sensory mechanisms that detect vibrations 

In the case of the human species, noise is created by an auditory system.

Sound waves are detected by the ears and converted into noise by the brain.

You are making the classic error of confusing sound and noise.

And my vacuum cleaner is very old and makes a heck of a noise.

But fortunately my deaf neighbour can't hear it.

See the Man

Listen to the Man

Make your own judgements.

A two party, us and them State, where wealth rather than intellect decides, ends up with a choice between two old incompetent white men as the National figurehead.

And they will tell every minority group that they love them.

And the trouble with a two party us and them State, is that a huge proportion of the electorate never need to think about what it is they are voting for.

Just turn up and vote for the same colour as last time, and the time before that, and every time before that when their Mum and Dad turned up to vote.

Fortunately, there is still a big enough minority of thinking moderates, who are able to keep things in check.

And long may they do so.

So that the rest of the World can still enjoy the electoral Circus from afar.

So who do you think actually runs the USA?

He undoubtedly was and still is a racist.

And he does what he does, solely for votes and personal gain.

And he doesn't give fig about religious doctrine, but will accept votes from any old gullible numpty.

In short; he's an old school, white privileged, hypocritical narcissist.

Nonetheless, his stand up routines are fun to watch...From a distance.

Ongoing conditioning.

When you first began using DebateArt, you were certainly a tad moronic.

Exposure to superior intellects has broadened your own intellect considerably, making you now one of our top contributors. 

10. The Off Button.

I'm guessing the crucifixion was a significant bit of the story.

Sort of, as in crucifix.

He perhaps would have preferred to be remembered for stuff like...

Loaves and fishes say.

So maybe a fishfinger sandwich would be a far more appropriate symbol for Christianity.

Don't forget the Mayo.

Grabbing her if she is about to run over by a bus, blown of a cliff or is drowning.

The consequences of which might also require CPR.

And an act of copulation requires someone to do something...It would be no good if people just stood and looked at each other. (Currently)

Also. 

Inadvertently when they are sleeping.

Though compulsory single beds, might be an option.

Also

CGS might be a solution to everything.

Compulsory Gender Segregation.

Though I do think that GOD actually designed women's buttocks as pre-coital spanking surfaces.

And Intelligence-06 would seem to concur with this suggestion.

Therefore this raises the question.

Should the State interfere with GOD's will?