Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16921 - 16940 of total 22990 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Sep 3, 2013 - 01:39pm PT
Off hand, I think it was 800 to 1000ppm

I'm not sure, though. I read up on it last week but am busy right now.

Now let me tell you about a terrific oil well that I found.....
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:01pm PT
Their folklore casts them as comrades-in-arms, regardless of ethnicity (the secret stories are told and cherished by white, black, and Latin children), for the homeless youngsters see themselves as allies of the outgunned yet valiant angels in their battle against shared spiritual adversaries. For them the secret stories do more than explain the mystifying universe of the homeless; they impose meaning upon it.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:04pm PT
I think the American people have every reason to be concerned about the banks. The banks have used "imaginary or fake products" and information asymmetry to cheat a lot of Americans, haven't they? And then, at least at first, maybe still, claimed that individual Americans have made individual choices. Freedom, isn't that what it's called in America? Freedom to be cheated based on asymmetrical information. Are you of the opinion that regulation and control of banks isn't needed?

Look, most Americans are "concerned" about the banks when they have reason to seek them out to spill some dough into their hands. Otherwise they could give a rats ass about "information asymmetry" ---and WTF is that, some nickel word meant to describe a dime concept? Some bullshit term cooked up by one of these political websites eager to replace a few thieving banks with even more additional thieving government bureaucrats.

Crooked banks have been around as long as crooked governments. The difference today is that the crookedness is used to justify smarmy little government bureaucrats-- who couldn't make it in the real world-- getting a piece of the action., all in the name of 'social' justice and altruism.
Meanwhile it's all capitalism's fault and "freedom" is a promise only little weenie lawyer/politicians can secure by their uncannily unselfish capacity to sniff out "imaginary or fake products"
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:10pm PT
Ward,

Sorry I said that. It was out of line and I had just been reading the nuts on the Climate Change thread. This thread has always had good behavior. I'll stay on topic if you will.

What's the topic, Largo?

Hee hee...

I shall nuke the offensive post.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:14pm PT
I did see a really common social phenomenon going on in the climate change thread:

That would be going out there and cherry picking data. Only use data that reinforces a dogmatic position, while ignoring data which disagrees. That is one of the no-no's of the scientific method.

You really have to be able to step back and look around sometimes. If you don't, then truth is irrelevant. Truth is chosen, therefore the definition of truth evaporates.

One guy keeps posting these graphs and saying crazy stuff. I clicked on the link and it took me to the Real Science website.

Check it out. This is how a lot of people get their information these days. With the internet, anyone can pose as an expert or authority..

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:29pm PT
Sorry I said that. It was out of line and I had just been reading the nuts on the Climate Change thread. This thread has always had good behavior. I'll stay on topic if you will.

Alright. Don't worry about it.
And you can go on discovering new wells.

Hey several years ago I had a friend who supervised a small crew of guys who at the time were obtaining sound readings from the area in and around Paso Robles, CA. He begged me to come up from LA and join them to enliven the discourse.
They had several trucks ( I got one stuck) that pulled these sound detectors around about the size of a small UHaul trailer . One group would shoot a pulse into the ground and another would pick it up some vector distance away, store it , and later my buddy would send that data to the main office in Colorado.
All day we wondered over the central CA hills having lavish hilltop picnics and shooting sound waves into the ground and scaring the hell out of the local cattle. At night we clandestinely attended several hell-raising biker parties in town.
Next day , hungover , we would fan out over the hills again, and my friend would try to convince me, to no avail, to do the same thing in Mexico the next month.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:51pm PT
What's the topic, Largo?


Wherever it goes, I suppose.

I had to reel myself in on this stuff. It can kindle like a crack high and I loose balance and start talking smack, which is fun to a point, like a roast or something, but the important issues get forgotten.

What I have started to learn from all of this wrangling to and fro is a practical approach on how to start framing the objective and subjective, objective and experiential respectively and in a balanced way. If you look at everyone from Zen Monks to a pop neuro-philosopher like Harris, they all have blind spots and indefensible positions at some level.

Only recently did I understand that we can never understand or know the limits of discursive reasoning by looking at physical phenomenon. You have to look at the mechanics of perception itself, how it works from the inside, from a POV not possible from without. More on this later.

JL
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Sep 3, 2013 - 02:56pm PT
Are you equating the broad based philosophical defense of capitalism and democracy and the criticism of totalitarian socialism

It's always one or the other..... But the fact is, totalitarian socialism didn't work and capitalism/democracy is on it's way out the door. Say hello to the new bosses: Corporate fascists and state capitalism.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 3, 2013 - 03:11pm PT
I say its Google Corporatism and Facebook Fascism, with a little Twitter Totalitarianism thrown in for good measure.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Sep 7, 2013 - 03:18pm PT
I missed the love from this old crew..

MikeL, I really hope that your wife is well!
And everything with you is cool with school.


Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Sep 8, 2013 - 07:12am PT
Scientists Use DNA to Assemble a Transistor from Graphene
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130906141918.htm
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Sep 8, 2013 - 08:38pm PT
Marlow: " . . . overgeneralizing and distorting reality."

This suggests that something can be done with reality. . . that it can be overgeneralized, distorted, somehow made different than what it is. How could that be possible?

"Well, I have had this experience, and when I talk about it, then I can distort, overgeneralize, or make it into something different."

And that's where people go wrong. Having an experience is undeniable, complete, and total--whatever the experience is. A experience cannot be changed, enlarged (silly), amended, or made different than what it is. And it is always what it is.

It's when people start to refer to an experience, to talk about it, to model it, measure it, label it, put it into categories, that's when things go wrong. Not possible.

Experience is what it is, undeniably. But any thing "of," "for," "about' experience goes wrong because that somehow attempts to shoe-horn infinity into some form (a limitation).

Look at just anything, and look at it very closely: whatever it is, it is Weird. Indeed, there's nothing but weirdness everywhere. Everything is completely weird. Just look closely, systematically, carefully.

Let's say you were God. How would You make a universe? Well most people would do it like children play with blocks and toys. They just take elements and make little things and then bigger things and then bigger things, but they would always be using the same materials. There would be wooden blocks, for example. And if we were to look closely at the wood in the blocks, we would see more wood no matter how powerful of a mechanism that we could find.

But that's not at all what we find. We look at the block, and it looks like wood. Now we get a magnifying glass, and the wood no longer quite looks like wood. It looks like some kind of cloth. Then we get out a microscope, and the cloth looks like a set of huge craters and hills. The we would get out a electron microscope, and the substance we call wood would look Way Different yet. Then we would have to visualize by theory beyond that, and we would find molecules which would appear very different. Then we would go further down and we'd find atoms. Further down, and we'd find sub-atomic particles that are Way far apart from one another, and we would find our selves saying that most of 'what's there" is simply open space. And on and on into infinity. Things just get weirder and weirder. And at each level there are unsolved conundrums that supposedly the next level solves (ha ha).

Or you can go up (the other way) and find the same process of unfolding weirdness, nested within weirdness.

Everything is like that. Nothing is finally findable or graspable. Nothing finally resolves. You would think that the more information that you'd have about something, the clearer and more resolution you would find, but that's not what you do find. What you find is that things don't cohere. They diverge. Everything is spinning out of whack with everything else. There are no final lasting equilibriums; everything is in flux, moving, incoherent, and impermanent, and interdependent.

"Well, what about all the patterns? What about linearity? What about order, forms, cause and effect??"

None of that really exists, not when you look very closely and very carefully. What you find is patterns within unpatternesss, linearity within non-linearity, order within disorder, forms that are ungraspable (within emptiness), cause-and-effect as simply a way of talking. There is a great wealth of paradoxes, dilemmas, contradictions, unresolvabilities among all fields of study or practice.

There are only really two questions in the universe that demand attention: What the heck is really what, and what is actually going on? The so-called answer to the questions are one in the same: IT. What is what is what is going on.

The so-called form and structure of the universe is the most crazy thing that intelligence could devise. (And all of this only scratches the surface.) What sense does it make that at every level of analysis something absolutely new and infinite shows up--where there is no context, no benchmark reference points, no top or bottom, no edges?

How can that be?

Soooo, when any of you complain that capitalism, human nature, politics, economies, various subsystems in the world "aren't working out" (even those that are human), you might want to look a little closer at the consensual view of reality. It ain't what it appears to be. Not really.

Reality is confounding and unexplainable; it is limitless, timeless, spaceless, without context, and resolute without resolution (no one can do a damned thing with it). Everything in it is absolutely perfect. Everything is exactly where it is supposed to be. Not a hair in the entire universe is out of place. You are exactly where and who you must be. There are no problems. There are no solutions. Hell, there aren't even any questions. Look at any question long enough, and it will vanish.

But almost no one is really looking . . . because They Know.



BB: My wife is fine, but a funny thing happened on the way down the stairs to the ICU and out--she's come back differently. After almost 3 weeks, we think we are witnessing some kind of spiritual realization or transformation. It's been really weird for her. Her values are being reordered, some of her core beliefs are being challenged, and she is not quite the superwoman that she was before the accident. We have had the best times and talks since we first met, I think. Who knows if it will last? I'm pretty stoked about it all, but she's felt the rug pulled out from under her feet. Everything is great. Thanks for asking, pal.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Sep 8, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
There are no final lasting equilibriums; everything is in flux, moving, incoherent, and impermanent, and interdependent

Good to see your POV back in play, MikeL.

Best wishes for your lovely wife.
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Sep 9, 2013 - 12:20am PT
But almost no one is really looking . . . because They Know.


Huh?
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Sep 9, 2013 - 08:57am PT
Fort Mental:

All of us believe we know the answers to what and why. When a person believes they already know something, they quit looking. What they see is what they believe. Experiencing awareness before one's beliefs takes hold is just about impossible.

Perhaps ayahuasca is a door opener--at least that's what I've heard. (Anyone try that stuff?)

My teacher says that you know you've gone off the reservation (delusion) when you think that anything is anything--when you realize that you're relying upon an interpretation. It's not that interpretations are wrong or bad (they are a part of reality as much as anything could be), but when we take interpretations seriously or concretely, that's when we are in delusion.


(Jgill: I have to say, you always seem to be civil and a gentle man. Thx. Be well.)
go-B

climber
Hebrews 1:3
Sep 9, 2013 - 09:30am PT
bump!
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Sep 9, 2013 - 09:31am PT
MikeL

The description of the experience is not the experience - in this we agree.

But let us say that tere's an accident - two cars crashing. Ten different witnesses describe the accident in 10 different ways (having different opinions about what happened and maybe even opinions about the motivations or intentions of the drivers). At the same time there's a black box in each car monitoring everything happening and being said in the two cars and there's four different videocameras filming the accident from four different angels giving us a clear picture of what has happened in space and time. My view would be that the black boxes and the videos would give us a quite good picture of what has really happened between the two cars and who has eventually broken the law or rules of driving on US roads. And that will be so even if the witnesses are describing the accident in very different ways.

Upon over-generalization:
If I say that I bought an apple today and your wife says that she bought an apple today and you say that you bought an apple today, and from this you generalize and say that we all bought an apple today (indicating us three) I would agree, but if you from this conclude that everybody bought an apple today - well - then I would say that you are overgeneralizing.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Sep 9, 2013 - 09:52am PT
But let us say that tere's an accident - two cars crashing. Ten different witnesses describe the accident in 10 different ways (having different opinions about what happened and maybe even opinions about the motivations or intentions of the drivers). At the same time there's a black box in each car monitoring everything happening and being said in the two cars and there's four different videocameras filming the accident from four different angels giving us a clear picture of what has happened in space and time. My view would be that the black boxes and the videos would give us a quite good picture of what has really happened between the two cars and who has eventually broken the law or rules of driving on US roads. And that will be so even if the witnesses are describing the accident in very different ways.
---


You've simply isolated out certain physical aspects of the experience, which is greater than what the video cameras recorded. IOWs, the qualia or subjective reality of being in the wreck is much more than the digital/visual representation of said wreck on a camera, which is nothing but electronic signals till consciousness renders it meaning.

JL
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Sep 9, 2013 - 10:15am PT
Largo

To repeat: The description of the experience is not the experience.

But by help of the black boxes and the cameras we can come closer to what really happened between the two physical cars. To isolate this from the pain and the experience of being in the cars is a good thing to do, if you want to be able to describe what happened between the two cars.

Intersubjectivity comes into play when describing what is happening in the videos, but describing and reaching consensus about what happened between the two cars is much easier by help of the black boxes and videos than by help of the different descriptions the witnesses have given.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Sep 9, 2013 - 11:20am PT
Intersubjectivity comes into play when describing what is happening in the videos, but describing and reaching consensus about what happened between the two cars is much easier by help of the black boxes and videos than by help of the different descriptions the witnesses have given.
--


I agree with this entirely so long as we are not saying that the physical description is a de facto look at the experience, and that the experience is an unreliable resource per what "really happened."

The mistake we often make here is to think that the experience was just a kind of subjective representation of the actual, physical reality of the wreck, when in fact the wreck was just one of may elements of the experience. We we try and reify the wreck as the "real" thing, we do so at the expense of the experience, which is our fundamental reality. Our discursive minds lead us to believe the opposite, which is a survival strategy and a gift of evolution. It takes some screwy kind of counterintuitive work to see that isolating out the physical from the experience reifies the physical as somehow "more real" or more fundamental than the experience itself.

We think backwards in the way just described because we survived that way and that's how we have some control over physical reality. The mind really is a wonderful thing. But when we look at reality only as a physical thing, we have huge blind spots. When we flip it - which ain't easy and makes no sense at first - the rational/discursive mind believes that what we will do is swap out a subjective view of material/objective reality for a subjective interpretation - like a person's subjective take on the accident, as opposed to what is recorded in the black box.

What the discursive mind does not and cannot know is that when you flip the paradigm, and view reality as though concsiousness was the real deal, the blind spots start filling in, NOT with the false and imgained "things" the discursive mind is afraid of or warns about, but that which lies beyond the discursive altogether, that which we can never capture in the black box.

JL
Messages 16921 - 16940 of total 22990 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews