News

**Devout Agnostic**

LoP Guest Wrote:

Maybe in the Navajo language, but not in English.

Science is a noun.
Doing science, or following a certain method, is the verb.

This is extremely important because there are many methods
of doing science. Some are more subjective than others, but the
logical positivists guarantee that there is only one method.

I dont think its an *extremely* important distinction, because the noun describes an activity. The word 'activity' is right up there in the definition. But I agree with what youre saying otherwise.

**Luvapottamus**

LoP Guest Wrote:

LP! That's very funny----I'm sorry about that---- I know exactly
what you mean though. It happens,,, and that schizophrenic
brother in law, may have seen, or interpreted, something real
about your Ex..

I guess my big deal with this topic is to get people to trust
their own visions and interpret their own experiences and not
to trust what a "scientist", or "theologian" says about the supernatural, or para-normal.

It's a lot funnier now that she's out of the house!

Lmao

I do think the brother in law was interpreting something he sensed. He came by after she was out and didn't see any "demons."

And thankfully, I think my ex is now back to normal.

*crosses paws*

chuckle

I have a pretty keen intuition about danger. I was stalked for awhile before and after
I gave the ex the boot. I'm not sure what the total story is there, but I think there was a bounty on me, a "hit" out for me.

There was a sense of the danger and sensory confirmation of it, I visually spotted a couple people up to no good.

And I also sensed when the danger was gone. I can't explain that with science.

But science might explain it some day.

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 65790 04-21-2012 10:12 PM

So far, we aren't running into many hard-core
atheists here.

We have even seen that some atheists do have a
religion; call it Buddhism, pantheism, or animism.

They can believe in the supernatural, the paranormal,
the spiritual, the synchronistic, and the psychic potentials.

I even doubt that many people will say that
Evil = ignorance. (and only ignorance.)

When we talk about genocidal maniacs and mass murderers
we aren't just talking about a mild case of distorted reality,
or being mildly retarded. ( But 1 % difference can be huge if we are talking about dna...)

Atheists may even agree that Evil, as a power, exists.

**Luvapottamus**

LoP Guest Wrote:

So far, we aren't running into many hard-core
atheists here.

We have even seen that some atheists do have a
religion; call it Buddhism, pantheism, or animism.

They can believe in the supernatural, the paranormal,
the spiritual, the synchronistic, and the psychic potentials.

I even doubt that many people will say that
Evil = ignorance. (and only ignorance.)

When we talk about genocidal maniacs and mass murderers
we aren't just talking about a mild case of distorted reality,
or being mildly retarded. ( But 1 % difference can be huge if we are talking about dna...)

Atheists may even agree that Evil, as a power, exists.

It sure feels like Humanity is being controlled and doomed by it when you look into TPTB and what they are doing. And not doing. And what they believe.

Depleted Uranium, terminator seeds, Cremation of Good Care, Fukishima, Eyes wide Shut.

But not to go overboard, it's important not to take that too far either.

**Devout Agnostic** · (This post was last modified: 04-21-2012 10:38 PM by Devout Agnostic.)

Luvapottamus Wrote:

Devout Agnostic Wrote:
Luvapottamus Wrote:
One of my aunts who was raised by crazy grandma, and her husband use the term "free-thinker" in lieu of "atheist" or "agnostic" but only if you ask them their religion.
Freethinker is really the most precise and universal term. The atheists i'm railing against would probably think its 'too polite', and it is, for their purposes. Their worldview is growing, because at the head of it are some very powerful people. Not every one is a genocidal eugenicist, but neither was every German who sat back and did nothing as the Nazis gained more power and started burning through Europe and 'undesirables'.
Many are followers of Bertrand Russel, who contrary to popular opinion was a real asshole.

But it cuts both ways. Some atheists are genocidal, perhaps even a growing majority? Hard to know if the others don't speak up. That's why I'm here.

I like the constitution, and freedom of religion. Freedom to have one, freedom to be free of it.

Some militant atheists may well be reacting to the Armageddon pimps as well. Not wanting to end religion, just wanting religious people to quit having a death wish for the world.

I personally think John from revelations ate the purple shrooms.

Russell on Eugenics: http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/russel...25/iss2/4/

He also got a Nobel Prize in Literature for commentaries on freedom of thought, kinda like Obama get a peace prize for wars he hadn't even started yet:

Quote:Wikipedia: A prolific commentator on religion, Russell—along with others such as Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and Friedrich Nietzsche—advanced a "new school of thought" that Greg Epstein calls "antagonistic atheism", which was "the view that religion was a thing of the past and ought to be brought hastily toward a point of declining influence". In 1950 Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought."

Many of the camp that concern me are armageddon pimps with their anthropogenic climate change eschatology, and they are so blinded by their irrational motivations that they cant even see it for what it is. But then, that's what eschatology is supposed to accomplish in the view of the priestly arts.

Have you ever heard of The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross? John Allegro was the only secular bible scholar to receive a portion of the Dead Sea scrolls to translate when they were discovered, and he ended up getting a lot of "ethnobotanical" material.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRixkHH56_A

**Luvapottamus** · (This post was last modified: 04-21-2012 10:41 PM by Luvapottamus.)

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

Russell on Eugenics: http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/russel...25/iss2/4/

He also got a Nobel Prize in Literature for commentaries on freedom of thought, kinda like Obama get a peace prize for wars he hadn't even started yet:

Quote:Wikipedia: A prolific commentator on religion, Russell—along with others such as Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and Friedrich Nietzsche—advanced a "new school of thought" that Greg Epstein calls "antagonistic atheism", which was "the view that religion was a thing of the past and ought to be brought hastily toward a point of declining influence". In 1950 Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought."

Many of the camp that concern me are armageddon pimps with their anthropogenic climate change eschatology, and they are so blinded by their irrational motivations that they cant even see it for what it is.

Have you ever heard of The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross? John Allegro was the only secular bible scholar to receive a portion of the Dead Sea scrolls to translate when they were discovered, and he ended up getting a lot of "ethnobotanical" material.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRixkHH56_A

That's where the Darryl Cherney song came from.

I think Bertrand Russel is a key to your OP thesis.

A lot of liberal secularists think he was a good guy because of the sexual freedom he advocated.

But you have to understand why he advocated it in order to see what he was really advocating.

**Devout Agnostic**

Luvapottamus Wrote:

That's where the Darryl Cherney song came from.

I think Bertrand Russel is a key to your OP thesis.

A lot of liberal secularists think he was a good guy because of the sexual freedom he advocated.

But you have to understand why he advocated it in order to see what he was really advocating.

he's very quotable, too, which is great for his public image. most quote-aficionados don't make a habit of checking the full context of the source materials, though. i never did, until i heard AJ put him in the same category as h.g. wells and margaret sanger.

**Luvapottamus**

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

Luvapottamus Wrote:

That's where the Darryl Cherney song came from.

I think Bertrand Russel is a key to your OP thesis.

A lot of liberal secularists think he was a good guy because of the sexual freedom he advocated.

But you have to understand why he advocated it in order to see what he was really advocating.

he's very quotable, too, which is great for his public image. most quote-aficionados don't make a habit of checking the full context of the source materials, though. i never did, until i heard AJ put him in the same category as h.g. wells and margaret sanger.

LaRouche opened my eyes to him. The LaRouchies think he's the most evil man of the 20th century.

chuckle

I'm a quasi-LaRouchie BTW. I like Rock and Roll, even though I know a lot about that too.

I'm not anti-sexual liberation either. But like the womens' movement, there were some nefarious things going on there too.

Like sticking us with broken two-income households.

**Devout Agnostic**

Luvapottamus Wrote:

I'm a quasi-LaRouchie BTW. I like Rock and Roll, even though I know a lot about that too.

Have you ever noticed that alex plays the hardest bumper music when he's got LL on?

**Luvapottamus** · (This post was last modified: 04-21-2012 11:22 PM by Luvapottamus.)

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

Luvapottamus Wrote:
I'm a quasi-LaRouchie BTW. I like Rock and Roll, even though I know a lot about that too.

Have you ever noticed that alex plays the hardest bumper music when he's got LL on?

No, I haven't. I did notice he always tried to shut Tarpley and LaRouche down when they talked about solutions. I think he let Lyn go for awhile last time. I'd like somebody to put LaRouche and Bill Still on at the same time, see how they mesh.

That's off topic, but Bill speaks of Andrew Jackson as a hero, and Hamilton as a scoundrel, LaRouche takes the opposite stance, but they both hate the Fed and want Greenbacks.

chuckle

That's also why I couldn't calibrate the Nolan Chart.

I'm a quasi-LaRouche dirigiste. Some people think Lyn is a right wing whacko, others think he's a left-wing whacko.

I think he's a Quirky Quaker.

edit: I also think he'd make a great president. Or Bill Still. Some kind of Still/LaRouche ticket would be great!

chuckle

**Devout Agnostic**

Luvapottamus Wrote:

I'm a quasi-LaRouche dirigiste. Some people think Lyn is a right wing whacko, others think he's a left-wing whacko.

I think he's a non-revolutionary communist, basically. When his political career was really gaining steam, the Nazis in the CIA took over, and he's just never been able to get over it. Like the stereotype of the high school football star that didnt get the college scholarship.

Non-revolutionary is a good way for communists to be, if ya gotta have 'em. I suppose if the opportunity arose, his think tank could always form an alliance with the red anarchists and things would get ugly in the streets real quick.

**Luvapottamus** · (This post was last modified: 04-22-2012 04:18 AM by Luvapottamus.)

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

Luvapottamus Wrote:
I'm a quasi-LaRouche dirigiste. Some people think Lyn is a right wing whacko, others think he's a left-wing whacko.

I think he's a non-revolutionary communist, basically. When his political career was really gaining steam, the Nazis in the CIA took over, and he's just never been able to get over it. Like the stereotype of the high school football star that didnt get the college scholarship.

Non-revolutionary is a good way for communists to be, if ya gotta have 'em. I suppose if the opportunity arose, his think tank could always form an alliance with the red anarchists and things would get ugly in the streets real quick.

If you look at his early years, the communist thing does gain some weight(though they did beat up some commies(???)), but in later years not so sure. People do change their views over time.

I don't think Webster Tarpley is a communist, but he certainly is a lefty.

And there is some truth to the "cult" aspect of the LaRouche organization, I've met the Houston chapter. But I think that's also understandable for any group that isn't mainstream.

I think Lyn has the right ideas for a sustainable economic recovery, but that's so off-topic, I won't bother with it anymore on this thread.

You are more than welcome to criticize that bunch on one of my threads. I've requested it a few times, but only got Chip Berlet type stuff that wasn't verifyable.

The support for the Clintons is my biggest red flag with them.

Anyhow, I think they did some good work exposing Bertrand Russel.

**Devout Agnostic**

Luvapottamus Wrote:

LoP Guest Wrote:
LP! That's very funny----I'm sorry about that---- I know exactly
what you mean though. It happens,,, and that schizophrenic
brother in law, may have seen, or interpreted, something real
about your Ex..

I guess my big deal with this topic is to get people to trust
their own visions and interpret their own experiences and not
to trust what a "scientist", or "theologian" says about the supernatural, or para-normal.

It's a lot funnier now that she's out of the house!

I do think the brother in law was interpreting something he sensed. He came by after she was out and didn't see any "demons."

And thankfully, I think my ex is now back to normal.

*crosses paws*

I have a pretty keen intuition about danger. I was stalked for awhile before and after
I gave the ex the boot. I'm not sure what the total story is there, but I think there was a bounty on me, a "hit" out for me.

There was a sense of the danger and sensory confirmation of it, I visually spotted a couple people up to no good.

And I also sensed when the danger was gone. I can't explain that with science.

But science might explain it some day.

regarding schizophrenia, its always used as the evidence that there really are mental illnesses, cuz look! Their brains operate differently! I just dont believe in mental illness period, for reasons related to my OP, and that includes schizophrenia. if you compare the pathology of schizophrenia to the traditions surrounding shamanism, there is so much overlap. i think mental illness is always the political pathologization of undesirable personalities or sweeping under the rug of people who are genuinely unhappy and neurotic because no room is made for them in our society.

And regarding extrasensory perception, its not hard to imagine what might be going on if, like some research has suggested, consciousness is some sort of nonlocal property of the universe. Which brings us back to GOD territory...