zedvictor4

We just wanted to make you feel wanted.

Though I suppose one could draw certain conclusions about the DebateArt community, from the apparent unpopularity of said entertainment vehicle.

Not that I wish to do so.

I suppose that my formative conditioning was why I grew up with only a limited interest in televisual and cinematic entertainment mediums.

Over a year I probably average less than one hour per day watching TV.

And I can't remember the last time I visited a cinema... It's certainly more than ten years ago.

Latterly, my laptop and primarily DebatArt have become my main entertainment and reference mediums of choice.

Though I make a conscious effort to not become dependant upon them.

Younger people and their reliance on hand held devices is an all too apparent sign of the times.

What form  do you think the next phase of the human/techno symbiosis will take?

Or should I say, the next phase of the technological takeover.

Hmmmm.

And the trouble with such a general overview is that it generally produces a glib misrepresentation of the human race.

And pointing out the generally  inaccurate vagueness of your classification system is hardly pedantic.

If you want to get pedantic lets look in depth  at physiology, anatomy and anthropology.

And perhaps also sociology.

So Black are Africans.

Even though Africa is a vast continent.

And the further North you go the lighter Africans become.

And White remains as indeterminate as ever

With not even a continental association.

And some Asians are as black as Africans, or as white as whites, or as swarthy as Spaniards.

And the greater part of Russia is to be found in Asia.

So a lot of Russians are yellow?

And American Indians are generally Asian in origin, with white influences

So should therefore should be pale yellow rather than red.

And then there is inter-breeding to consider.

And strange orangeness for sure.

Predominately respectful people with opinions.

And the odd but harmless pseudo-Russian.

So what if the mugger was a swarthy Spaniard.

Were they black or white?

I not sure that I act.

I just proffer opinions based upon how societies are structured and how societies work.

Which basically all boils down to how people are structured and how they work.

The species has been around for 300000 years or so and as an organism it's basic operating programme is still very much the same as it was.

Intellectual capability has obviously developed, but intellectually capability still cannot override basic instinct.

The basic instinct of survival necessitates selfishness, and in modern societies  selfishness and selflessness are dictated by financial wealth.

And so 300000 years later the survival of the fittest manifests as rich and poor, and not so much as life and death.

Inherent capability always was and still is a variable human quality, and unselfishness never was and is still not instinctive.

Though care for others outside of family groupings has become a learned and established social principle, but based upon affordability rather than evolved altruism.

What specifically is Black?

And what specifically is White?

Is a swarthy Spaniard for example, black or white?

Is it just skin pigment that is the indicator?..If so can you quantify the amount of pigment that defines the difference between the generalisations that are "black and white".

And therefore are higher levels of pigment the specific cause of dishonesty and poor social morality?

Society is such that people become rich and poor.

And attempts to realign society always fail.

Because in your utopia, you would just replace one ruling class with another.

You cannot enforce equality. 

Enforcing equality is a contradiction in terms.

And let's face it...The passive introduction of equality is also a non-starter.

Isn't it more a case of affording to buy.

Because I assume that in a capitalist society, all U.S. citizens are allowed to own said property.

So unless your referring to a socialist utopia, the current  status quo would remain in the U.S.

And of course in a true socialist utopia, ownership and value would be irrelevant.

Will all depend upon radiation levels before and after the collapse of human society.

Well, not in the American sense.

Though people do define themselves similarly, have similar long standing associations and enjoy dropping names into conversation.

But to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure that loose educational associations to prominent people satisfies much more than the ego. 

Which is not to say that ego is not mentally beneficial, if it instils a sense of positivity.

It did occur to me though, that we apply physical laws to physical properties.

So we can only apply said laws to physical matter.

Therefore "nulla" will not necessarily be subject to physical laws.

Sort of another aspect of a GOD analogy I suppose, whereby something is outside of the physical realm.

Something being nothing in this case, rather than a magical bloke.

Because magical blokes would inevitably be subject to the laws of physics.

So GOD was nothing but something became of nothing.

Mathematically 0 to 1.

Or 1 to 0 the point at which maths and physics becomes finite, and the point at which physical laws become irrelevant. 

You "burn" what you consume, so quantities are relative and therefore burn-time is also relative.

And of course, the balance of foodstuffs and fluids is important.

Brick shitting is mostly associated with poor diet and low fluid intake.

I work in the pharmacy industry, and it is all too apparent that a lot of people would rather rely upon laxatives, rather than address their poor dietary choices.

For sure.

Very sort of Neo Nazi.

People like flags and symbols.

Makes them feel like they belong to a bit of the human race.

Do you think that Vlad admired Kim?

And a 4x4 pick up truck.

Whereas a pimped low rider is the Black Nationalists vehicle of choice.

The Atheists vehicle of choice is a bicycle.

Older Christians also like the Honda Jazz.

Orthodox Russians like anything painted green with a missile launcher atop.

Yep for sure, we can conceptualise zero.

And therefore intellectually regard zero as a finite number.

But aren't fractions of 1,  just concepts that represent infinitely smaller quantities of 1.

I'm not sure that one can ever conceptualise the point at which 1 becomes 0.....Or 0 becomes 1.

Or should we just intellectually regard this as a universally creative law.

A smooth transit through the gut is what is required.

You don't want to be shitting bricks, as they say.

Shitting bricks is bad for the lower part of the system.

Eating late in the evening is not such a good idea either.

Never analysed semen closely, but there's bound to protein in there somewhere.

Are you a 30/30/40 person then?

I see that Ted was a Brit.

So I rest my case.

I am Ted's Bro too.

And therefore your Bro.

Says in his profile that McGraw dropped out of school, and is only 56.

Your fraternal association is a bit loose.

Could potentially be anyone in the U.S.

Or potentially anyone.

King Charles is my Bro.

Now I've got to look up Ted Koppel.

Odd or even.

Though I suppose that 1 becomes 2 becomes 4 etc.

Things don't begin at 1.5.

Though 3 becomes 6 etc.

So evenness always prevails in an expansive system.

In a contracting system, 1 - .5 - .25 - .175 etc.

Or 10 - 5 - 2.5 -1.75 etc

Are these fractional parts odd or even?

Of course this only represents 2 dimensional activity.

3 dimensions is a different kettle of fish.

Though if a 3D system expands in all directions we initially arrive at seven-ness.

Or oneness I suppose

Nonetheless, can we ever achieve zero-ness?

Random thoughts on a wet Tuesday morning.

Inspired by EbuccubE.

Spit or swallow?

Grazing is best. Big meals overload the digestive tract.

Who is Tim McGraw?

Obviously not the Country Singer.

Yes it would be nice for something to turn up/return.

I suppose that given the scale of things it would be impossible for something to be in two places at the same time.

Sort of omnipresent as it were...Daft idea hey?

Hmmmm.

Cosmic ancestry.

Seeds of life floating around somewhere sounds like a basic evolutionary beginning to me.

Doesn't explain the seeds of life though...Other than as pre-universal remnants, maybe.

And the trouble with testable theories is:

They are either, actually testable.

Or we can create a computer programme to test and verify a theory that isn't physically testable. Wherein the computer only actually tests and verifies its programme.

Whereby we are left with a theory.

Ok nearer the equator.

Here in Wales I generally prefer to keep well covered.

Got it.

It's a roleplay thing then.

Ok. 

Beer in Bromsgrove sounds good. Leave me to think about it.

And Me and Mrs Zed are well.

Hope that you and yours are too.

So did Mr Omni GOD exist and then create lots of interesting things to do, or was he created with lots of interesting things to do like create.

If the latter, then who did the creating etc.

And if the former, then how exactly?...Which is the point at which all hypotheses fail.

Fear not spam and trolls BK.

You're an important initiator of subject matter.

And therefore an essential component.

Why did GOD create anything?

Can you imagine infinite boredom.

Everyone needs a hobby.

So off down to Hobbycraft, buy a bag of fundamental matter, and get crafting.

So now you know.

The Universe is probably now in a box in his shed, gathering dust.

Presumably GOD gets the Devil to do the burning.

Or is the Devil outfit just a role play thing.

I bet GODDO gets really miffed by cremation.

Are souls are inflammable, do you know.

Exactement Deb.

Though GOD is crying tears of drizzle at the mo.

Slip

Slop

Slap

So I'm painting the bathroom.

Thanks to the SUN for kitchen and bathroom emulsion

Amen

No coincidence Stephen.

All data is inherited.

Reworked and elaborated.

The Sun is the giver of everything.

Neither demanding praise or caring about criticism.

But will smite you down if you do not respect it.

Funny how GOD is a 60's West Coast hippy with a North American accent...Sort of swarthy and Arabic would have been more believable.

And the little girl with facial paralysis was demonic...I bet that she had very sharp teeth.

That's one hypothesis Trade.

The GOD of the OT and the God of the NT were previous hypotheticals.

He is, because Men said so. Women did the foot washing.

It is the unmade maker, which is counter-intuitive.

BIG BOOM.

Material evolution.

Now.

And the MAN-GOD still no show.

Yes I got that.

There are multiple possibilities.

Including.

No GOD.

No hell

And no burning

Human collective stupidity is a force greater than It's component parts.

Did sex get much of a mention in BK's list.

Just hugs, self massage and cold baths.

She would certainly be popular in the U.K.

Being a Brit.

I had to look up MIT.

So what does a MIT brain think.

I would expect a MIT brain to disregard belief in the way that I do.

And to not disregard anything reasonably hypothetical.

The trouble with being highly educated is that if one is not careful, one can easily loose sight of common sense.

Especially if one is highly educated in subjective non-sense.

My Dad used to accuse me of living in a fantasy World.

Though I think that he was referring to the luxury of youthful exuberance.

Something that he missed out on as a child of the 1920's and 30's.

Which nonetheless made him an excellent teacher in subjects relating to theology, and made me the grounded atheist I am today.

Despite the  best efforts of the C of E.

High in what respect?

Extreme wealth  compared to basic income

Or ratio of higher earners to basic wage earners.

And I can see that  taxation and a high level of social service provision, might be regarded as wealth redistribution.

Though I assumed that BK was being cynical.

Stupid analogy Trade...You can do better.

Actual seats and hypothetical GODs are two different kettles of fish.

There are various applicable words to describe the chances we take when sitting down and/or praying to a supernatural GOD.

Though a seat is demonstrably real, whereas a hypothetical GOD cannot be proven to exist..

The application of words and language makes no difference.

Faith in GODS is blind.

And a seat is real, but comes with an element of risk.

Yep.

I would say that the above is a reasonable proposition.

But I would also say that the opposite is also a reasonable proposition.

Therefore I would further suggest that amidst such uncertainty, belief is superfluous.

One hypothesis suggests that a singular seed of life was successfully transferred from a previous Universe and came to rest upon a suitable planet.

But of course there could have been multiple seeds.

Because if distribution was a random process that relied upon the chance fertilization of a viable planet with the seed of life, then multiple seeds would be the more efficacious strategy.

No hypothesis ever comes close to explaining the beginning though.

The beginning of matter and consequently the beginning of life.

Would he view LGBTQetc as a positive development.

I'm guessing that a lot his angst was a result of late 18th century sexual angst.

And far less to do with global food production.

I'm guessing that humanity is meant to survive for as long as it takes to get it's predetermined job done.

How many survive is perhaps irrelevant, as long as the necessary ones survive, or the necessary ones are created.

If the necessary ones can be created then the dross will become dispensable.

Of course, otherers elsewhere may have been beset the same objectives.

And cooperation might or might not be necessary.

I suppose to a greater extent this depends upon whether the development of intellect follows a similar pattern across the Universe.

Therefore, was it also necessary for all life to occur simultaneously.

Which would similarly depend upon the simultaneous development of  Solar systems with life supporting Planets.

A lot to expect perhaps.

Give or take a few hundred thousand years of development, and the disparity between rival intelligences would be considerable.

Would be like us sharing our current level of technical and astrophysical knowledge with Neanderthals, and expecting positive feedback.

If Malthus were alive today what on earth would he make of things.