zedvictor4

Just struck me that he was formerly a Nazi, means that he is currently not a Nazi.

Just like everything that was formerly...Now isn't.

Though I would assume that the inherent contradictions  are applied or not, relative to previous contexts.

Mystical bollocks BK.

He ate when no one was looking.

One way to earn a living I suppose.

Otherwise known as Mysticlbollockseatingdeceptivelyarianism.

Someone whose diet is restricted by their own need to appear mystical and special, will inevitably be skinny.

I'm a Threemealsadayandnospiritualbollocksarianist.

Such are clever people.

We haven't quite left the Dark Ages yet.

Hampered by the inherent sloth of the human condition.

Still bogged down by religion and tribalism.

Assuming that with all our gadgetry, somehow we are  emotionally progressive and connected.

Nope, emotionally retarded and as paranoid as ever.

That is...All except you and me and our tribe Stephen...LOL.

Worcestershire...Land of the free.

Well, I'm and expat.

I think that my expectations have always been the same really.

Which might seem a tad contradictory.

When we are young we expect that a modern society somehow as more to give.

But that is a materialistic view of things.

I was never encouraged to expect too much, and encouraged to be content with simplicity.

And though inherent emotions often challenged my situation, especially in the early years of marriage and whilst my children were growing up, I never strove to achieve more than was necessary, but never  felt that I was missing out.

I think what I am trying to say is...That although I was  aware of expectations, I never possessed an overbearing need to achieve them...If that makes sense?

And I think that I am very much the same now.

Interpretation, misinterpretation and reinterpretation Trade.

All indicative of uncertainty rather than a definitive answer.

So you need to prove something that you cannot prove.

And I do not need to disprove something that cannot be proven.

Status quo relative to alternatives.

But always enjoyable to interact from time to time.

Sounds amusing.

I will take a look later.

They were created good, but sinned.

So why did they sin?

Because the were created thus.

And then you go on to say that the weak fence was the fault of the designer.

Which was exactly the point I was making.

Week humans were the fault of the designer.

Thought is an involuntary, in built design feature and process of the functioning organism.

And sexuality is an in built and deliberate design feature of the organism.

So Adam thought about sex, by design.

As GOD intended.

And let's just make it clear that in the last instance, I'm referring to GOD, and not God.

Design or inevitable occurrence...Who knows.

Nonetheless Trade...Cause and effect.

Dogs for example, may not be factually knowledgeable.

But their sensory awareness far exceeds that of humans.

They know stuff that we can never know, as it were.

So in terms of degrees of sensory awareness/consciousness, I would say that we are relatively lacking.

Whereas in terms of manipulating acquired data and developing matter, our capabilities far exceed that of any other living organism.

So similarly, we know stuff that they can never know.

Though in both cases, consciousness  as in switched on and functioning, is of equal necessity.

True.

 "Awkward"...good choice of word.

I would say that my relationship with my parents was always awkward.

They were kids of the 1920's and I was a kid of the 1960's.

Our expectations were so different.

Though these days I see so much of my dad in myself... In terms of expectations and what I need in order to find contentment.

Hey, things have developed.

So the thread was worthy.

And funnily enough, as young children my sister and I were only allowed to watch children's T.V. between 5 and 6pm.

Suggests that you and I were conditioned.

Which is probably  also why I am atheist. 

And goes to prove that what we think today is likely to be based upon what we were taught as young children.

You stated that we were all born sinners, and that Adam and Eve wanted more.

And you just stated that "God created humanity- but he did not create sin"...So who unwittingly incorporated sin into the design then?...And then blamed the product.

So my conclusion was based upon your statements.

If an omni-sensible GOD didn't want these features incorporated into it's design, then the design was flawed.

Which I think is a  pretty logical conclusion Trade.

And a gun is designed with a purpose, that if effective, is not flawed.

If I designed and built a fence, that blew down in the first strong gust of wind. 

Would that be the fences fault?

Or mine for building an inadequate fence.

If a GOD designed us and we are faulty.

Then the buck stops with the  GOD

Though  if a GOD was omni-sensible, it would have realised it's error, and rectified the design fault.

As it was we were  just let to get on with things.

Though one might suggest that in terms of material evolution and the role we play in GODS greater Universal purpose.  

Cognition and the development of intellect...Wanting more as it were...Is a specific and crucial design feature.

Really, sin is just a latter day side effect of the human condition relative to the development of sexual angst.

This probably makes GOD chuckle.

LGBTQ...Hark, is that roars of thunderous laughter I hear.

I would regard consciousness as switched on and cognitive systems functioning appropriately.

Once switched on, organisms acquired varying levels of awareness.

1 to 10

1 to 360

1 to 360 000 000

Depends upon the size of the increment.

Though I do understand the analogy.

I would further suggest that in terms of awareness, certain other animals possess higher levels of sensory ability.

Isn't knowing stuff and remembering it, just a consequence of consciousness and awareness?

Mike and the Mechanics....The Living Years.

Give it a listen.

Hmmmmmmm.

Honestly couldn't say.

Though certainly not Boris.

Will ask Mrs Zed later, and get back to you.

If we are all born sinners, then we were clearly, badly designed.

So not our fault.

The poor designer's fault.

Nope, show me an omni-sensible GOD Trade.

Not a sin and salvation nutcase.

Just make sure that you're there for him when he needs you.

That's all that he requires.

He doesn't need you to be anything other than you.

Trouble is Trade.

Religion has always taken sides and sponsored wars.

Simply because a religious person is no different to a non-religious person.

A general overview of an entire species is not the same as ones perception of an individual.

Though your T.V. inspired kidnapping scenario is not really relevant to the discussion.

True.

But I think that evolution is bigger than Darwin.

Or more specifically, a universally concurrent process that preceded and exceeds species evolution.

Perhaps to a non-species conclusion.

The true GOD will be revealed but will we ever get to know it.

Irrespective of hair care.

Ones location relative to nuclear strikes, will dictate whether one looks chemo or not.

So I'm not sure that stocking up ones survival cupboard with products should be made a priority, or will in fact make any difference to outcomes.

If you want to look good at the end, perhaps a wig would be a better choice.

Consciousness theory, consciously slammed.

In so much as consciousness defines itself.

Even if we don't fully understand the intricacies of the processes involved.

Slamming, is a current and popular conscious  exercise.

As is backlashing.

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.