we are all full o it.

1. 59

   Jeramiposted 12 years ago

   I have come to see that everybody really is saying some truth.
   
      It really is a shame that modern technology doesn't come up with a computer program that can not defrenciate between BSH-t
   and all the other fine points that everbody on here come up with  ....
   
   
   
      and maintaine enough integrity to see the    "REAL" commanalities that are avaliable to come up with a real answer to all of our questions ..
   
   
   
        does anybody besides me realize that we all have a little truth that we want to share?
   
       and we are ALL  wrong .....    just enough to ....   mess ourselves; just enough that somebody else can point at us and say  ....     YOU are full o S---
   
       the quicker we figure out that we are ALL in the same boat.     The sooner we can fix the hole in the boat.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Evolution Guyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Cripes! A BS filter? That would mean no more religion on the internet. I am all for that. Will it filter out people too lazy and inconsiderate to properly format their text to make for easier reading?
      
      Speak for yourself Jerami. I am guessing you are having a bad day. I hope things improve for ya.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks for your well wishes  ....   but that that doesn't mean that You are any less full of it than any of the rest of us.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Evolution Guyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yes - I know that is what you really wanted to say. Dishonesty from  a theist? Fancy that. Color me shocked.

            replyreport
   2. 65

      steve8millerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Amen brother. Need I even say more? Read my truth, it make make you ill.

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, YES, you will need to say more. You will not be able to help yourself. You seem like you have the same problem. I guess that would actually put you into the same boat, per se.
         Really? "my" truth? You are joking right?
         Probably not, but bring it, IF you have more?

         replyreport
   3. 73

      getitriteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't believe we are ALL in the same boat...unless you are referring to planet earth.  Of course, I'm not capable of discerning life on the level that you are.

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Sarcasm? Just asking?

         replyreport
         1. 73

            getitriteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Definitely sarcasm.

            replyreport
            1. 72

               Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               That's what I thought. Thank you for responding.

               replyreport
   4. 60

      kessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      All are in the same boat until that one realises exactly what that boat is....
      
      And from that point on he is apart from the boat,for he will lave it for another.
      
      But who can know this except those that has seen?

      replyreport
   5. 75

      Eaglekiwiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I agree-because
      
      Nobody knows everything (so how can they judge impartially)
      
      Nobody is perfect
      
      Everybody needs the same things to survive (air,water,food,shelter)
      
      After that comes the pursuit of satisfaction,peace,fulfilment,love etc.
      
      We all need to give love and to receive love uncondionally.
      
      At least that (IMO) is a worthy aspiration.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      SirDentposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Pro 3:5  Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
      Pro 3:6  In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
      Pro 3:7  Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Mr. Sir;    I missed this the other day  ;  sorry
         
         
            I like them verses.
            True-er words have never been spoken.
         
         Hope all is well on the home front?

         replyreport
2. 72

   Cagsilposted 12 years ago

   To fix the hole, is to figure out what caused the hole to come about.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yea    yea    yea    that is so full of wisdom that I can not comprehend.    excuse me.
      
      
          I pass.

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Actually Jerami, it talks about what is the underlying cause for the "hole" that needs to be "fixed", as you claim.
         
         I am sure, you are happy to believe that "we are all full of it". And, in a manner of speaking, many are.
         
         As for your sarcasm about wisdom? It seems you hold and/or reserve judgment on me, for past conversations, which apparently didn't favor you much.
         
         Nice to see you are showing of your true character. Maybe you should re-evaluate yourself. It seems like you don't have control over your ego. Just a thought.
         
         Btw- I certainly hope things do get better for you. I saw your post in the other forum thread, where you were speaking with Brenda. You have an interesting outlook in that post, but seems your actions don't match. I'm not surprised, but did want to point it out though.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Well thanks for poining out that which you don't want to point out     How you;  that apears to be.
            
            
                Bur "NO"     You do not see that which you would like to think
            
            
                But then again   we been touching each other (In thought) or quite some time.
            
            
            
                 But; I been coming up empty handed much more than I would have expected!

            replyreport
            1. 72

               Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               
               Actually, there isn't anything wrong with my perception. I am unlike you, and use it properly, which is to not distort what people say. You take pride in twisting things, then placing blame on others, when you obviously refuse to see yourself is your problem.
               I've not given you much thought, until you managed to open nearly a dozen threads recently. Most of which, attempts at saying something profound, but fundamentally failing to see your own failures in the thought process.
               And, I am sure you don't know why, considering it's more than you expected. Which means, you're obviously missing something. Just another thought.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Yep ....   that is your problem...
                  
                  
                      You think more is better..
                  
                  
                      You don't understand  Ssooooo   you think more o nuttin is more= enough.

                  replyreport
   2. 0

      kimberlyslyricsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
3. 57

   MelissaBarrettposted 12 years ago

   @Jerami
   
   You realize it's not working right?  Take a breath-refocus and come at it from another angle.
   
   It's probably not going to work then either, but the exercise will be good for you.
   
   I'm not coming down on you, but you started the thread so the burden of proof is on you.  You are dealing with the logical, so that burden will need to be in their language.  If you can't meet that burden, concede and move on.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      lone77starposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      @Melissa, why do you say it's not working, because humility is so foreign to you?
      
      Proof and logic are traditionally the domain of science (and also law), but any good scientist will realize at least occasionally that humility is required in a quest for knowledge. Pretending that you know before you get there only affords blindness. Make sense?
      
      Like the pitiful, so-called scientists who held sway over the "Clovis first" dogma. Some of their peers were afraid to dig below the Clovis horizon because what they found there could threaten their careers. Geez. Science by intimidation! How thoroughly Dark Ages. Quick! Hide the proof before the overlords get here.
      
      Scientists haven't woken up the the fact that "skepticism" is the wrong paradigm for them. It misses on one very key ingredient in scientific method -- avoidance of bias. Skepticism contains the potent bias of "doubt." Professional use of skepticism usually looks more like the better paradigm, humble restraint. Too often, though, skepticism descends into the diametrically opposite world of unsupported dismissiveness or even self-indulgent ridicule, something that forum trolls know a great deal about. How's that for logic?
      
      When people "knew" the world was flat, they didn't look for evidence against it. When the church quashed anything that disagreed with Aristotle or their limited interpretation of scripture, they were not being humble, either. The founder of their church would figuratively "roll over" to hear of such an outrage. But it isn't science or religion that's the source of this kind of problem. It's ego. And the antidote for that is humility. Try it some time. You'll like it. Or maybe not! Especially if you're too attached to it.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Lonestar "@Melissa, why do you say it's not working, because humility is so foreign to you?"
         
         As humility isn't really foreign to me, I would say that probably isn't the problem.
         
         I'm saying that if you are really wishing to change someones viewpoint then the discussions need to be in a common language.  If you are wishing to understand, then the conversation needs to be in a common language.  If you are wishing them to understand, same thing.
         
         If you are wishing to have someone agree with you, then you speak the same language as the people that agree with you naturally.  He's preaching.  Preaching to the choir is pointless, and preaching to someone that doesn't agree is futile.

         replyreport
4. 0

   dixie28714posted 12 years ago

   yep we are all full of it, because we are all human!! no bs machine will ever exist.

   replyreport
5. 0

   Sherlock221bposted 12 years ago

   I have my own views concerning religion and science, evolution and creationism etc, and of course I believe them to be right.  Everyone believes their beliefs to be the correct ones, otherwise what would be the point in having them.  They would not be beliefs if we didn't believe in them.
   
   I have also come to the conclusion that there are fundamentalists on all sides of the debate.  There are the religious believers, who refuse to consider the evidence for evolution because their particular religion rejects it, so they decide to ignore the very real evidence out there.  However there are also the militant atheists, who reject out-of-hand any view which is different to their own. 
   
   I believe in debate and challenging beliefs, not in the fingers in the ears approach, whereby we dismiss people as being ignorant, because they do not share our own view of the world.  If we all continue with this method, then differences will only widen allowing for no common ground.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      lone77starposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Sherlock, how thoroughly brilliant! Now, you've got my attention.
      
      BLINDNESS
      
      There are blind people (not physically blind) in all areas of life. And likely everyone has areas of blindness in their lives -- things which are foreign to their way of thinking.
      
      As in education, sometimes it's a matter of finding the right analogy to "teach" an individual something they're struggling to comprehend. Sometimes it requires a different method of teaching. Like some people are very visual, others very tactile and others auditory in their learning. Me? I'm visual. I like demonstrations, diagrams and even charts with numbers.
      
      EGO
      
      Regrettably, though, egos get involved and some people feel threatened if a new idea is thrust at them. They reject it or attack it. Like Evolution Guy, bless his soul. Called me a liar for believing in evolution!  Imagine that! Just because he can't rub two gray cells together to imagine how my own worldview can contain what he views as diametrically opposed ideas, doesn't mean such is not possible. Logically, it could mean that his bulb is not burning too very bright. That's one possibility. He has an area of blindness or diminished capacity.
      
      ABILITY TO SEE BEYOND THE LITERAL
      
      I feel fortunate to have grown up in a household where, even though my grandfather was a Southern Baptist minister, we were taught to question things, to look for answers beyond the obvious or the rote. I turned to science, but never forgot my roots. I have found truths all around me. You just have to know how to look.
      
      TANK CIRCUITS
      
      For instance, while studying electronic engineering in Los Angeles, during the 70's, I realized that I was surrounded by tank circuits -- trillions of them. Anyone who has studied radio technology knows that a tank circuit is a radio frequency tuning circuit made of a capacitor and coil in parallel -- trading on the "break even" point between inductance and capacitance to determine the tuned frequency. As a life-long student of astronomy, I also knew of absorption and emission spectra. I realized in an instant while discovering about tanks that all of the atoms around me were tank circuits -- capacitors (electrons separated by a distance from their nuclei) and coils (electrons circling their nuclei). Nature had us beat by 13.7 billion years on radio technology.
      
      LASERS
      
      Seeing the world around us with humble eyes allows all kinds of possibilities. I remember reading that the inventor of lasers had been stopped at a traffic signal, but stayed on the corner watching the signal change back and forth, slowly coming up with his idea for light amplification by simulated emission of radiation circuitry. The rest is history. The fact that greedy companies stole the idea, helped him after much legal wrangling to become one very wealthy scientist -- right when lasers were in high demand. If his patent had gone through right away, he wouldn't have made nearly as much.
      
      RELIGION & SCIENCE
      
      Science and religion work in completely different worlds. Skeptics would have us believe that religion is working in delusion. Many fundamentalists are ignoring reality -- a perfect definition of delusion. Some believers think science is flawed. Perhaps it is, but likely not for the reasons they cite.
      
      Science deals with the realm of continuity. Space, time, energy and mass. Continuity allows science to draw conclusions from observed phenomena.
      
      Religion and spirituality deal with the realm of discontinuity. This is the realm of creation. This is intangible and hard to fathom for someone who is entirely entrenched in physicality. They cannot imagine a world without continuity. But let me give you an example: forgiveness.
      
      FORGIVENESS
      
      When you resent someone else because of some perceived injustice, you are holding onto the continuity of that effect on your personality. The teachings of some religions point to forgiveness as a solution. But what is forgiveness, really? A friend of mine, in Los Angeles, used to say that she forgave her mother for the alcoholism and beatings, but she kept complaining about it. That's not forgiveness. Forgiveness is breaking with the continuity that binds one to the source of resentment. It is counterintuitive. It is perhaps even illogical, from the victim-perpetrator side of things. But if you want your way out of blood feuds (a sane choice, I might add), one should opt for forgiveness.
      
      AWAKENING
      
      One late afternoon in 1977, I found my most profound example of forgiveness. I didn't realize it for thirty years, because it took me that long to realize that I had forgotten the trespass of six drivers in nearly causing accidents by their reckless driving. That forgiveness was accomplished by a combination of humility, confidence and responsibility. Only recently did I realize that responsibility was a key ingredient. I took 100% responsibility for their recklessness. And look at that! With that very act, I was no longer a victim. With the humility and confidence, I awoke the true immortal self within -- that made me invulnerable. Anything could have happened to my car, my body... it didn't matter. Fear disappeared.
      
      The next moment, something miraculous happened. And I can't believe some of the lame things skeptics say about this Miracle on Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles. Roughly 2000 cars participated in clearing two miles of center lane during bumper-to-bumper, rush-hour traffic. This was only moments after my epiphany of responsibility, and after the mental picturing of wide open spaces and smooth sailing all the way to my destination. The center lane remained open ahead of me for four minutes. Statistically impossible. Impossible by the selfish nature of humans in traffic. Any way you slice it, this was a spiritual being who had awoken, if only for a few minutes.
      
      I feel the true self stir from my eternal slumber whenever I relate this story. I feel the ego losing ground and can't help but smile.

      replyreport
      1. 75

         Eaglekiwiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Im smiling

         replyreport
      2. 95

         wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         An interesting way of thinking, but I'm not sure it has any value out of entertainment.
         
         "See beyond the literal".  You compare a tank circuit with a capacitor and a coil to an atom.  Now a capacitor is two conductors separated by an insulator and is constructed in such a way that one conductor may have more or fewer electrons relative to the other conductor.  An electron - nucleus is not such a system by any stretch of the imagination.  There are no conductors to put excess electrons on and you may not put electrons onto the nucleus at all.  They do not have even similar electrical properties.
         
         A coil is a conductor wound into a helical shape and gets its electrical properties from the EMF generated when an AC current passes through the conductor.  An electron "orbiting" it's nucleus does not travel in a circular pattern (the term "orbit" is hangover from the 60's) that a coil provides but rather jumps about rather frenetically and randomly.  There is again no conductor for the electron to travel on.  There are no similarities in electrical properties between a coil and an atom.
         
         You have thus imagined a connection or similarity between atoms and the parts of a tank circuit (thinking beyond the literal) but those similarities do not exist and are thus of no value beyond the interesting entertainment the thought provides.
         
         
         
         You also indicate that you took full responsibility for the actions of others which I assume you could not affect.  Immediately thereafter an "impossible" hole opened in traffic which you attributed to your mental action.
         
         Firstly, such a hole is not "statistically impossible" at all - statistics and probability rather prove that such an occurrence is definitely possible although of a low probability.  Secondly you have made a serious logical fallacy in concluding that because action A preceeded action B that A caused B - there is no indication that this statement is true.  If you could repeat the experiment 100 times and find 100 identical results it would probably be true, but the same cannot be said for one example.
         
         
         This time you have shown a relationship by use of non-literal thinking between action A (taking personal responsibility for anothers actions) and action B (a lane opening up in traffic).  The relationship is tenuous at best and consists only of a possible time correlation so far.  Should you continue to experiment, with excellent documentation and independent observations, and prove your assumption to be true it would certainly make a truly major impact on the highways of the world as well as the people driving them.  If you do not, the incident becomes nothing more than an interesting and entertaining coincidence that once more is no value.

         replyreport
6. 75

   lone77starposted 12 years ago

   Jerami, coming together sounds good if we're working toward the same ends. Too bad some get a cheap thrill out of working at cross purposes. Some even want to see what a sunken boat looks like.
   
   Finding new truth and moving beyond our own current, limited truth requires humility and an ability to loosen attachments.
   
   Some of the skeptics clamor for logic and proof, but don't realize that their calcified viewpoints wouldn't allow proof that didn't fit within that worldview. That really is taurus-twinkies (BS).
   
   Trolls are typically having too much fun stroking their own egos to pay much attention to a hole in the boat. They're high on the drug of self-importance.
   
   Some of them might not even see proof if it bit them in the butt. Attachments to worldviews can be that blinding, at times.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There is a higher purpose, but it's not a god. And, actually doesn't NEED to be to a higher authority.
      Troll? I'll agree for some, if not most here, it is about ego, but some do have a better grasp(understanding) than others. And, effectively are not actually trolls. The "troll" is with regards to one without hubs or just a few, but talk with authority on the forums. Your last sentence, should by self accountability, should actually shame(humility) on you. Only because your use of the word "drug". I get the meaning of using it, but wasn't actually necessary. In the end, it was inflammatory than good.
      An interesting statement. Now who is talking with ego? Proof is in the understanding of life, one's own life. You talk about humility? Yet, your actions? Ironic? No.
      This might have some value, but I'm sure it can be overcame, easily. It's based on one's individual ability to know themselves and love themselves, so they can love other people. To know yourself is to be your own authority and have NO NEED to answer to a higher authority at all.
      
      It all starts with character, which is in every action taken or not taken(doing nothing is still an action).

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Sherlock221bposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I do believe that extremism on all sides is no answer to the current, often angry debate between the religious and the atheist.  Some people are so programmed by their way of thinking that it is impossible for them to examine other people's beliefs and they are so quick to find offense, when none was intended. 
      
      I have taken part in a debate on another site, which discussed the heated arguments between some atheists.  In my post, I mentioned the "militant atheism" of Richard Dawkins.  I received a response from someone who was so angry that I stated that Richard Dawkins advocates "militant atheism."  How dare I refer to Richard in that way?  Now the strange thing is that I actually agree with Richard Dawkins on most issues.  All I had done was simply quote Richard himself, from a talk he gave to TED, in which he urged "militant atheism."  Yet I was criticised for daring to quote Richard Dawkins, even though I am a supporter of what Richard Dawkins has to say.
      
      This experience has gone some way to making me see that it is not only the religious who are so easy to take offense, and that the non-believer is often as angry as the fundamentalist religious believer, because of their certainty in the rightness of their beliefs.   Irrationality is not the preserve of the religious.  I have found myself having to defend my beliefs to someone who shares the same beliefs as myself.  Being human is crazy.

      replyreport
7. 0

   Home Girlposted 12 years ago

   We are full of lots of stuff. Just dig carefully. Being human is wonderful!

   replyreport
8. 59

   Jeramiposted 12 years ago

   Sherlock221b wrote
     Irrationality is not the preserve of the religious.  I have found myself having to defend my beliefs to someone who shares the same beliefs as myself.  Being human is crazy.
   
   - = --  ==
   
   me
     That happens all of the time !  It truly is sad that "MOST" of the time no one notices.
   
     I Think  (My own opinion)  that most Atheists in these forums are 50% correct in the things that they say  and 50% WRONG in other things that they argue.
   
     The same goes for the fundimentalists(christian) on here.
   
     Most of what atheists argue about is religious DogmA; which has nothing to do with the existanse (or not) of God; though they seem to debate as if it does.

   replyreport