zedvictor4

Same old theories, that currently all lack definitive proof.

Nonetheless, alien intervention is a worthy theory.

One can train a dog to behave in a particular way. Though it's behaviour will always be compared with human behaviour, by humans.

The dog will not make such comparisons. It will simply respond appropriately, according to circumstance.

What I am saying is, the concepts of right and wrong do not exist in a dog's brain.

So if a dog kills a person because of the circumstances in which it finds itself, then it has done nothing wrong. The onus of responsibility for the dogs actions will fall upon humans.

Though in such circumstances the dog usually ends up as the fall guy.

Ah! Souls for sale.

Lubricant supplied at no extra cost.

Helps you slip through the portal into heaven.

Mass hypnosis could perhaps solve all the World's problems.

But that would depend upon the hypnotist.

Do you think that if we all sang a hymn at the same time on a Sunday (not clock time relative to time zone), it would be audible on the moon.

Perhaps if we relayed it to an orbiting loud speaker system with a particularly big sub-woofer.

Obviously something would need to be listening.

Perhaps that's where GOD'S hidden microphone is.

No and No.

8 billion and counting.

Don't think that a few abortions makes a whole deal of difference to the bigger picture.

A few more would perhaps be beneficial.

Of course, common sense all round would also be beneficial...Here's dreaming.

Question:

If a couple had chosen a condom rather than abortion, what would the difference be, in terms of population?

Answer:

Zero gain, so no difference.

One would assume, that we were originally animals that lived in a family group, headed by a dominant breeding male.

Naturally, we  developed varying ideological social systems, some which advocated monogamy and some which didn't.

I don't think that as a species we are instinctively programmed to pair bond.

Naturally, we also developed procreational drive into a recreational activity, wherein monogamy is also not a necessary requirement for everyone.

Nature is everything that occurs within a universe, therefore everything is natural.

I've clearly stated NO.

And also provided an explanation.

In a nutshell, dogs do not conceptualise and therefore make distinctions between right and wrong.

And you seemingly ignored my question.

Not what I said.

The dog, relative to it's instinctive programming and behaviour would not be doing anything wrong.

Whereas the persons involved in the scenario would be.

Because as DavidAZZ points out, humans make conscious assessments and decisions within a legal ethical and social framework. Which includes conceptual distinctions between right and wrong.

(Which isn't to say that human behaviour isn't underpinned by a certain amount of basic instinct.)

And just out of interest, a question for you.

Why makes a person defenceless and a dog not?

One might suggest...The nature of the beasts.

Otherwise, personhood is the state of being an existent person...Any person.

No psychoanalytical BS required.

And dogs cannot do anything wrong because they are not programmed to.

Whereas persons often behave counterintuitively...Which to be fair, is the nature of the beast.

It's like, a head covering attached to certain items of person clothing.

Like  doggyhood is a covering attached to a doggy jacket.

Similarly Kangaroo's.

Or Rhinoceros's.

Or Sperm Whales.

Is this helpful?

Megalomaniacal dictators do have a tendency to simultaneously encourage and yet despise the proletariat.

Yep, that's a way of looking at things.

And I wouldn't disagree with it.

Based upon my non-university education.

Well.

Supposedly,

Aaron was Moses's brother.

And the noses rhyme, was one of my late Dad's little ditties.

Interesting that noses rhymes with Moses.

Moses nose is,

Longer than.

Aarons square un.

Two options really.

Boxing injury,

Or variable genetics.

I'm guessing that you've heard of Moses?

He holds the record for the youngest ever person to cross the River Nile in a coracle.

Well.

Data assessment is not difficult, if the data is of a recognisable format.

Though interpretation might take a few moments rather than be instantaneous.

It all depends upon how familiar one is with a particular composition, it's definable parts and how the composer intended it's composition to be representative.

Language and it's definitions, is a broad subject.

My primary comment concerning no space surrounded by space, was more about human perception than about theoretical physics.

After all, we are both  limited and unlimited by imagination.

Though, theoretical physics is also imagination. 

Quantum leap, imagine that.

Not sure what left tribe projection might be.

Or who Kelly Osbourne is.

Though this moderate Brit see's the fields of Eastern UK awash with Eastern European vegetable pickers.

And the hospitals and care homes of the UK, awash with nurses from the far flung corners of the world.

Because very few self respecting pseudo-natives are prepared to get their hands dirty anymore.

Thanks be to migrants.

Of course, it's worth pointing out that all Americans and Brits are the descendants of migrants.

And GOD said:

All Jews shall have long noses.

All except Aaron,

And he'll have a square un.

Proof proves something.

If it doesn't, it won't.

Who's going to do all the dirty jobs for low wages then.

Why would an atheist bother to struggle with something that is not worth bothering to struggle with?

Kids die.

So:

1.  Put them in a box and burn them.

Or:

2. Put them in a box in the ground and leave the to decay.

Are the two most popular options.

No problem.

One can assume anything.

So what is no space?

Staggering statistics for the staggerable.

Of course, some folk suggest that an extra-universal guy knocked it all together less than 10,000 years ago.

Whichever.

Makes you wonder where all the stuff came from though.

Maybe from an infinite DIY retail outlet.

Universal matter, in the green bags, on the shelf next to the tile grout.

Dread to think how much it cost.

Single blokes and their hobbies hey.

And Mr Fermi got a paradox named after him.

For stating the obvious.

Hypothetically perhaps, if you've a mind.

If not then don't bother.

Consider this.

The trouble with the Trinity.

Is that there could be four or more things.

The Father

The Son

The Daughter

The Holy Spirit.

For example.

But if Christians accepted six propositions.

They would be Sexytarians.

This is just as logical as any other guff.

Space and time are intangible and available, so do not need creating.

Stuff doing stuff is the tricky bit.

If there was no space, it would be surrounded by space.

People also have a tendency to exaggerate and write associated folk tales.

And some people like to think that such folk tales are true and accurate.

Whereas the truth was that there was a local flood event and a woman named Norah rescued some goats in a rowing boat.

This was an assumption, but more logical and less exaggerated.

We could always blame Mickey Mouse instead.

Because it fits with all the necessary requirements.

I also have an account with Debate Island, in yet another name.

Don't find it particularly user friendly though.

The problem is.

For some.

"Spanking"

Is a positively connotative word.

Abuse can also have connotations.

Though more inclined towards the negative.

Just saying.

Spanking has both arguments and rhymes.

Whereas.

What rhymes with abuse?

Also.

Avoid beat and whip.

6. To make a smooth or frothy mixture.

Mousse for sure.

Is a smooth or frothy mixture.

Hmmmm.

Perhaps we're still here as transplants from there.

New name, new identity though.

Sort of a witness protection programme.

Selective In-vitro population management systems, are a sensible idea in a progressive technologically advancing society.

So as an intellectually evolving collective, perhaps we should be considering  a move towards this progressive style of population procurement.

Rather than simply, how to achieve a "raw dog" without unwanted consequences.

Perhaps also, in the short term, it would be more intellectually appropriate to move towards same sex methodology, in terms of achieving temporary sexual satisfaction.

Until harvesting and sterilization programmes are in place.

Of course in the long term, genetically engineered asexuality should be the ultimate human aim.

But for sure.

For the time being.

Wear that V and freezer badge with pride.

And Test Test Test.

Yep, we seem to have reached a point of general agreement.

Though, as I conceded previously, the Swedish example still relies upon cooperation.

Also, in terms of both social culture and population Sweden is markedly different to the USA and the UK. So one must be careful when trying to make direct comparisons.

He's nine.

But said thanks for the compliment.

Well firstly one needs to be big enough to play.

But not necessarily a fathom.

Perhaps half a fathom.

Prior to that one might get water boarded, if ones parents have previously been daftified.

Knife sex rituals are not uncommon too.

Daftification:  The process by which a child's brain becomes stupidified...

Can lead to psychotic episodes.

Symptoms include, various irrational bodily movements, singing and shouting.

In severe cases, one can develop obsessive attachments to guns and high explosives.

Let's say six chambers, one live round, one pull of the trigger.

Would you take your chances for £1 million?

16.666666666666666666666666666666666.

Good morning Sunday Steven.

Church first, Pub after I suppose.

Like.

We would always pick the right group even if it was the wrong group.

Or vice versa, depending upon whose point of view one is seeking guidance from.

It's a sort of win win, lose lose, win lose or lose win situation.

A bit like shoving a gun up ones arse and playing Russian roulette.

For sure.

Cogito ergo sum.

All evidence is relative to this, though ultimately we will never actually be able to qualify this statement.

So a belief indeed.

Though contextually we tend to apply this unqualification, as the standard basis of ongoing data management.

And on this basis we formulate a system of truth, falsehood and belief.

I think that ice cream is cool and gorgonzola is stinky.

I also think that the latest escalation of the Palestinian crisis was self induced.

Though such crises will inevitably occur, when delusions of grandeur are perpetuated.

The consequences of tobacco and alcohol ingestion, though similar in terms of potential detriment, are distinctively different in terms of what is generally regarded as overdosing.

As for the quality of tobacco and alcohol products:

Despite legalization and regulation, black-market trade still exists, therefore the quality of all products cannot be guaranteed.

And this can be said for virtually all consumer products.

So it's fair to suggest that the legalization and regulation of other potentially addictive chemical substances, such as opiates, will not eradicate the black market trade of low quality products.

In the UK; the availability of free rehabilitation programmes involving synthetic opiate provision, has not reduced the level of opiate related deaths. Nor has it reduced levels of addiction.

Nonetheless, I will concede that the regulation of certain potentially harmful chemical substances, may affect overdose rates, but only where people choose to comply with a regulatory system.

Which is certainly not the same as proposing that the legalization of all drugs will end the overdose crisis.

Unfortunately, despite all the relevant information being out there, there is seemingly very little that can be done to stop certain people doing stupid things.

OK.

So empty is not the best descriptive.

Electrically charged space is more appropriate.

Context.

Very true.

Thinking that one either does or does not exist, requires the same amount of mental effort, within the context of existence...Psychosis is how we have come to classify certain instances of mental processing, based upon the rationality of output relative to a collective expectation.

Believing that one will be able to continue breathing for a prolonged period, is more of a calculation based upon an assessment of real time events, within the context of existence.

A real time assessment of events wherein survival cannot be guaranteed, is not really a lack of faith, but simply a realistic assessment of a situation, within the context of existence.

Being prepared to ignore logic and accept without real proof that a creator GOD is a fact rather than an assumption, is an acquired trait.

Belief is a loosely definitive label that we can apply to such mental processes and associated conclusions.

Doing fine thanks.

People are selectively moral.

Always have been.

Probably always will be, for as long as it's written into our DNA.

Labels such as "Pro life" are just self adhesive tokens of insincerity.

Easily peeled off.

Well, tobacco kills more people because more people use it...Same with alcohol.

Perhaps because it is legal.

Though the damage is mostly long term, rather than an immediate reaction to an overdose, or a bad reaction to an impure substance.

And people should not die as a result of clinically controlled treatment.

Nonetheless, the term "drugs" is something of a generalisation, referring to potentially dangerous chemical substances.

And of course, some substances are potentially more dangerous than others. Especially when an immediate overdose is ingested. 

Eat a bowl of apple pips and you will OD on cyanide.

Even so, I don't think that apples are addictive.

Which is why apples are legal and heroin isn't.

I read somewhere that an atom is mostly empty space.

So we are actually composed of very little.

Maybe so.

But they were replaced by the same but different.

The controlled will always resent the controllers.

Well, having belief in oneself could mean a variety of things.

For instance; do you mean belief in one's existence, or belief in one's ability to achieve something specific

So, here's a question that you will enjoy.

Considering that the human mass is 90% bacterial.

What actually are we?

I suppose that we are a mass that is 90% bacterial and 10% other.

Though given the theory, perhaps we we are actually 100% something infinitely/finitely smaller than human or bacterial cells.

Which is sort of what I have thought for a long time.

There's a huge difference between  legalization and a controlled therapy.

In the UK we already use synthetic opioids as a controlled therapy, but this relies entirely upon the will and cooperation of the patient. 

The reckless will still overdose, legally or not.

So the current  culture of supply and distribution might change, which might affect the culture of drug use in relation to the addicted.

Perhaps that is what you are driving at.

Though are you certain that the legalization of addictive drug supply and usage, wouldn't encourage a wider level of participation.