date:20140420

On 20 April 2014 18:42, Samiya Illias  wrote:

> "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
> -Albert Einstein
>
>
> He then went on to say...

The letter states pretty clearly that Einstein was by no means a religious
person - in fact, the great physicist saw religion as no more than a
"childish superstition". "The word god is for me nothing more than the
expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of
honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty
childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this",
Einstein wrote.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:

> So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered
> through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
>
> The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and
> contemplation you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search
> and find faith.
>

To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?

So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question back
a step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or Max
Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Samiya Illias

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 1:16 PM, LizR  wrote:

> On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>
>> So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered
>> through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
>>
>> The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and
>> contemplation you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search
>> and find faith.
>>
>
> To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?
>

I don't think anybody has the answer to that. The mind keeps going back to
who created the world, and who created the universe, and what was before
that, and who created what was before it, and before it, till we are either
left with nothing and chance and chaos, or an unexplained,
incomprehensible, initiator we call God. For those who think its nothing
and chance and chaos that we come from, then the question is settled as far
as they themselves are concerned. But for those of us who think that there
is this God, and everything has been created, the question arises: why?
That is the answer we search for.

> So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question
> back a step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or
> Max Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis.
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Kim Jones



> On 19 Apr 2014, at 2:15 am, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 18 Apr 2014, at 11:02, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Friday, 18 April 2014, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>> 
 On 18 Apr 2014, at 08:41, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
> On Friday, April 18, 2014 7:28:26 AM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> On Friday, April 18, 2014 7:28:02 AM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thursday, April 17, 2014 8:03:09 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> Hi, 
>>> 
>>> A good sum up of the how and why cannabis might cure cancers. 
>>> 
>>> You can understand the mechanism and the probabilities. It is a pretty  
>>>  
>>> good movie. 
>>> 
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bMt83_IWkE 
>>> 
>>> We knew this since 1974. Promising research on cancer treatment were   
>>> purposefully broke down. 
>>> 
>>> How could we hope rational decisions with respect to climate when we   
>>> tolerate brainwashing, even a sort of revisionism, on cannabis/hemp,   
>>> and cancers? 
>>> 
>>> The problem is not stupid politicians, it is clever bandits. 
>>> 
>>> The prohibition of cannabis deserves truly the Nobel Prize, in Crime. 
>>> 
>>> But it might also be their fatal error, I think. 
>>> 
>>> I think the world will get closer to paradise when the humans will   
>>> stop confuse p -> q with q -> p. That confusion is exploited by the   
>>> fear sellers (pseudo-religious or not). 
>>> 
>>> Bruno 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>>  
>> It's a load of rubbish Bruno. Cannabis ha
>  
> sorry...it
  
 sorry again. It's a load of old cobblers because cannabis has been 
 available to researchers throughout.
>>> 
>>> When I read Jack Herer a long time ago, I leave the book away when I came 
>>> to the chapter where he claimed that cannabis cures might cancer (and did 
>>> cure some cancer for mice in 1974). I thought the hippies was going 
>>> crackpot on this. That was to gross. 
>>> But when in 2009 a spanish team rediscovered that fact(*), I have 
>>> scrutinized both the allegation of cure, and the allegation that rserach on 
>>> cannabis was discouraged. That second point is rather clear in the US where 
>>> cannabis is schedule one, making research quite difficult from the 
>>> administrative perspective (virtually impossible in most universities). The 
>>> first point is now accepted in the mainstream, but the media and the 
>>> doctors ignore it, probably because cannabis is illegal.
>>> You might read:
>>> 
>>> (*) http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37948  (original spanish paper)
>>> 
>>> http://www.mapinc.org/newstcl/v01/n572/a11.html
>>> 
>>> You can find many papers on cannabis and cancer here:
>>> 
>>> http://www.safeaccess.ca/research/cancer.htm
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 Why would anyone want to obstruct a cure for cancer? No one would care 
 what it was. olu
>>> 
>>> Those who profits from selling expensive treatment for cancer. Those many 
>>> who want hemp staying illegal.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
  
 But it isn't a cure for cancer. Nothing is a cure for cancer in this way. 
 Cancer survival rates are up on 30 years ago. Controlling for earlier 
 intervention do you know how much lung cancer survival rates have changed 
 ? They haven't. Nothing has changed. catch it early and you've got a 
 chance. Leave it just a few more weeks and now that cancer is evolving. 
 It's made up of more and more descendent cell lines...each one mutating, 
 now different ancestries are fighting and destroying,. Now a week later 
 there are millions more., You might kill one line but the next one is 
 immune because now it's multiple mutations later and it's totally 
 different  and the colour is maybe green. In the firs or few weeks it's 
 just a few descrendent lines..they are young, they aren't mutating like 
 crazy yet.
  
 Nothing is going to cure cancer. Not in this scientific revolution. 
 They'll fix maybe the cancerous non-encoding dna. But that'll be a 
 symptom...cancerous cells are multiply disfigured...and more keep showing 
 up.
  
 Smoke dope fuck the pope but it'll give you cancer before it cures 
 anything.
>>> 
>>> Those who have tried to prove this are those who discovered the benefices 
>>> instead. I let you search on the links above.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 thi
 By the way I know at least 2 people that got institutionalised with 
 schizophrenia as a direct outcome of dependent pot smoking. That's the 
 only thing either of them ever did anyway
>>> 
>>> 2 people is not a statistics, and when the statistics are done properly, it 
>>> seems only that people with schizophrenia, or potential schizophrenia,  
>>> tend to medicate themselves with cannabis, explaining some previous 
>>> correlations. If you have a reference

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Kim Jones



> On 20 Apr 2014, at 6:16 pm, LizR  wrote:
> 
> To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?

The problem is solved once and for all when we cease this ridiculous game of 
imagining God to be a being or an entity. God is not a being or an entity. God 
is a concept. God is:

Everything we know
Everything we know that we know
Everything we do not know
Everything we suspect we do not know
Everything we cannot possibly know (due to the limitations of hominid 
brains/minds)
Everything that was, is or will be

In short, God is - wait for it:

The Everything. The Everything cannot possibly have a name nor an identity.

Kim




Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL

Email:   kimjo...@ozemail.com.au
 kmjco...@icloud.com
Mobile: 0450 963 719
Phone:  02 93894239
Web: http://www.eportfolio.kmjcommp.com


"Never let your schooling get in the way of your education" - Mark Twain

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 05:15, Samiya Illias wrote:

Chris, I was replying to Spudboy100 who refuses to consider the  
Quran because of the 'jihadis' 'behavoir' . The point I was trying  
to make is that some people, from all religious persuasions, do  
strange and at times horrible things. We need to look past people  
and their behaviours, and examine the religious texts to evaluate  
for ourselves what it is. We are all responsible for our own beliefs  
and actions. We come to this world alone, we will leave it alone.  
What religious label we are born in, which religious label or not we  
choose, eventually we all must face death alone, and whatever's  
beyond that. Wishing it away because some people are poor  
ambassadors or poor communicators of the message, won't change  
things according to our wishes. We humans have intelligence and a  
vast wondrous world full of thoughts and ideas and science and  
signs... we must explore everything we can for its own merit before  
discarding it.
On this Everything list, I see earnest seekers exploring almost  
everything, but somehow they stop short of scripture, especially  
Quran. I understand much of this has to do with a filtered view of  
history, long-held prejudices, popular media, as well as the actions  
of people who poorly understand or use the religion, etc. The thing  
is, to understand everything, we must be willing to explore  
everything.


I read many "sacred" texts, including different translations of the  
Quran. But I found some text more convincing, or more heart-vibrating  
than others. I studied three years of classical chinese to be more at  
ease with the taoist proses, notably.
For the Quran, some verses are formidable and can talk to my heart,  
but not so for other verses, and muslim scholars were a bit  
contradictory on how to interpret it.


But the main reason why we stop at scripture is only that they are  
scripture. They are human very imperfect way to address the divine,  
and, by my own faith, contradicts the deepest intuition I have on that  
matter, which is that religion cannot be normative and allow  
"authorities" to think for me, or intercede between me and the "good  
lord".


Some people seems to accept that "intercession", and I don't want to  
judge them. May be it can make sense in some survival strategies, but  
it is no more religion to me.


Bruno





To answer your question, you may find these versions of history  
different from what you may know about Muslim conquests:

http://lostislamichistory.com/did-islam-spread-by-the-sword/
http://lostislamichistory.com/?s=crusades
http://lostislamichistory.com/the-crusades-part-3-liberation/

Samiya


On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Chris de Morsella > wrote:
Samiya - Has Islam never participated in perpetrating violence  
against others; in conquest?


Islam is as guilty as the other Abrahamic faiths, as an agent of  
violence in human history.


Chris



From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com 
] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias

Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:57 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com


Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



People do many strange and horrid things in the name of religion or  
nation or some other pretext. Violence has been perpetrated by the  
Crusaders, by the Nazis, by the Buddhists in Bhutan, by the Hindus  
in the Kashmir, Babri Masjid, by the Jews in Palestine, the Soviets  
in Afghanistan, the US and Allies in Iraq, and the list goes on...


One must look beyond the people and evaluate religions for their  
message.




Samiya



spudboy100 wrote: Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and  
what happens to humans in this world. If such a spiritual  
intoxication leads to an ecstatic, plunge into violence, a "holy"  
violence, then a reasoning person may pause, and ponder what is  
lost, what is gained, and what is the damage done? Rather than focus  
on the internal realm of self, I concentrate, for now, on behavior.








On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:26 PM,  wrote:

Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what happens to  
humans in this world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to an  
ecstatic, plunge into violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning  
person may pause, and ponder what is lost, what is gained, and what  
is the damage done? Rather than focus on the internal realm of self,  
I concentrate, for now, on behavior.


There are many 'interesting' things to learn about Islam only if one  
is willing to look beyond the prejudices.


The more one studies and contemplates on the Quran and the world,  
the more one falls in love with God. It is intoxicating, it's an  
amazing feeling!


-Original Message-


From: Samiya Illias 
To: everything-list 

Sent: Sat, Apr 19, 2014 11:10 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

There are many 'interesting' things to learn about Islam only if one  
is willing to look beyo

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 Apr 2014, at 05:55, Samiya Illias wrote:

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
It is explained: [Quran 2:219] They ask you about intoxicants and
games of chance. Say: In both of them there is a great sin and
means of profit for men, and their sin is greater than their
profit...

That is an authoritative argument. You must understand that this
is not a good point for the Quran, or that interpretation of the
Quran.

How can *you* be sure if the prophet did not misunderstood God?

The original Arabic words of the Quran have not suffered any change
over the centuries.

That might not necessarily be a good sign.

What do you mean?

I have less problem when religious text allow comments (like the
torah, or the buddhists and taoists).
In human matter, including their relation with the divine, I find
unanimity suspect.

They are not the words of the Prophet. He was only the messenger,
transmitting the revelation as received.

Asserting this might not add sense to me. I respect your belief, but
I will be vigilant about you respecting possible other beliefs.

Fair enough

Have you come across any human book which has about 6236 sentences,
and millions of people know it by heart completely, from beginning
till end?

You are not reassuring me, here.

Just pointing out a unique miracle that I know not of any other
book. I do not understand your comment.

In North Korea, it seems all kids have to know by heart the life of
the tyrant.
Knowing "by heart" is close to brainwashing. Again I would prefer that
the kids could resume it critically, and add personal comments.

Ideally, I would like the kids not even knowing the religion (or even
the political opinions) of their parents, and I would like them having
at school a broad view on all religion, and good course in logic and
argumentation.

In 99,9% of the case, people get the religion of their parents, and I
don't find this quite sane. I am aware it is a sort of obligatory
passage, and I give time to time.

This original manuscript is protected from human interpretation...

My question is: what if a young person tells you, "I don't want to
study by heart the Quran, I want to study by heart the Bhagavad-
Gita"? Will that person keep a decent life in your neighborhood?

The question is besides the point: can the Bhagavad-Gita or any
other book be memorized by heart, from beginning till end, word by
word, in the original language?

Yes, but I am not sure it is a quite good idea. Only theater and poem
should be learned by heart.

Do millions of people already know it by heart, so that the
authenticity of the original text can be verified by cross-checking
various sources?

Why is that authenticity needed in the first place? It looks more like
a quest of self-identity than a trust in god. It looks more like
crutches for the one who lack faith. Again, if it can help some
people, why not, but I don't believe in literal account of the divine.
The divine is subtle and the human hands can lead his soul astray.
Like you said, a good sacred text is a good intoxicant, and my
experience is that some plant might be less nocive, with respect to
open your mind to the authentic inconceiable freedom, to borrow an
expression to the Vimalakirti-Nirdesa.

There are many decent people on all communities and societies who
have different sets of beliefs and religions, as well as different
sects within the same religion. I have Hindu and Christian
neighbours, and that's fine.

That's very nice.

Saudi arabis just decided to make atheism illegal. Do we agree that
this should not be tolerated? I am not an atheist, but I consider
that each human can think for himself, as long as it does not impose
its idea by dishonest means or violence, threat, etc.

The word used for sin also means frustration; tiredness;
laziness. Thus, I gather, both mind and body eventually suffer
from the harmful effects of the intoxicant, and thus the
negatives far outweigh the benefits.

Initially, the believers were advised to pray when in a clear
state of mind, and not when under the influence of intoxicants: :
[Quran 4:43] O you who believe! do not go near prayer when you
are Intoxicated until you know (well) what you say,...

Gradually, they were exhorted to refrain from it altogether:
[Quran 5:90] O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling,
(dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an
abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination),
that ye may prosper.

References:
[Quran 2:219]
http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=2&from_verse=218&to_verse=220&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_yusufali=1&show_shakir=1&show_pickthal=1&show_mkhan=1&show_urdu=1

[Quran 4:43]
http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=4&from_verse=42&to_verse=44&mac=&translation_setting=1&show_yus

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Steven Weinberg wrote
On 20 Apr 2014, at 06:59, LizR wrote:

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would  
have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil  
things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

-- Steven Weinberg


Of course, we can guess that he meant "that takes institutionalized  
religion".


I can conceive a religion which takes seriously the "non-naming"  
attribute of god, defended in theory by many religion, but of course  
in theory only the day they are institutionalized.


Tradition and institutions are for the non-believer only, and  
eventually it kill the rest of faith that some people can have.


For good people doing bad things, you need misinformation (like in  
Rwanda, or in Europa), you need propaganda (like with prohibition).  
You need some brainwashing, you need manipulation, authoritative  
argument, fear exploitation, violence, ... All things that many would  
qualify as non-religious in the extreme.


Bruno






On 20 April 2014 16:54, meekerdb  wrote:
On 4/19/2014 9:01 PM, Samiya Illias wrote:
Including Uri Geller, UFOs, a thousand people who want to "prove  
Einstein wrong", Borley Rectory, the people trying to sell me  
something from Nigeria, the Loch Ness monster, Ouija boards, Thor,  
Zeus, Odin and so on - yes, no doubt one shouldn't dismiss  
anything, but life's too short not to prioritise.


Too short, yes! Prioritize, yes!  Especially because if there is a  
purpose to this life, and especially if there is more to life after  
death, and if this short life is but a test, whose result is  
eternal, then we better study earnestly. Difficult, yes,  
impossible, no!


"It's an incredible con job when you think of it, to believe  
something now in exchange for life after death. Even corporations  
with all their reward systems don't try to make it posthumous."

 Gloria Steinem, women's rights activist

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:12, LizR wrote:


On 20 April 2014 18:42, Samiya Illias  wrote:
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
-Albert Einstein


He then went on to say...

The letter states pretty clearly that Einstein was by no means a  
religious person - in fact, the great physicist saw religion as no  
more than a "childish superstition". "The word god is for me nothing  
more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible  
a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are  
nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle  
can (for me) change this", Einstein wrote.


I really would like to suggest you reading the quite deep book by  
Jammer on "Einstein's religion"(*).


You have to be careful when quoting Einstein on this. I think Einstein  
was very deeply and authentically religious, like Gödel.
Like often in such case, such person are also the most shocked by the  
institutionalized religion, and very often Einstein made clear that  
his condemnation of religion relate to that. All his life Einstein  
insisted that he is a believer, and that he despises the atheists and  
so called free-thinker, but also all the churches and religious  
institution.


I would say that the more you genuinely believe in God, the more you  
are shocked by what humans do with the notion.


I differ on Einstein in that I do believe theology has a large part  
which can be made into science. Here I am closer to Gödel than to  
Einstein.


Bruno

http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Religion-Theology-Max-Jammer/dp/069110297X

A good amazon abstract:
>








--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:


On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean  
discovered through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?


The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and  
contemplation you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather  
search and find faith.


To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?



Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has  
to be a Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)


But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As  
answer that is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search"  
attitude, i.e. the God of the gap, maintained by those who want you to  
believe in their view on reality, and prevent you to search and  
question them.


God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most  
good one. At least not in any public way.


Bruno



So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the  
question back a step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory  
of nothing" or Max Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 April 2014 22:41, Kim Jones  wrote:

>
>
> On 20 Apr 2014, at 6:16 pm, LizR  wrote:
>
> To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?
>
>
> The problem is solved once and for all when we cease this ridiculous game
> of imagining God to be a being or an entity. God is not a being or an
> entity. God is a concept.
>
> "By which we measure our pain."

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:50, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/19/2014 12:37 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Then, the cultivation of industrial help -- which is not  
psychoactive -- was also made illegal. Industrial has a wide range  
of applications: paper, fabric, building material and cheap protein  
source, to name a few. It threatens several industries and it is  
not a narcotic. How do you explain that?


How do you explain that growth of industrial hemp was encouraged by  
the government up through World War 2?  Did it not pose the same  
threats then?


Good question, but it seems to go in Telmo's direction. It shows that  
the banning of hemp was indeed purely irrational, and motivated by  
making easy money based on lies. it was only a way to impose oil and  
forest against a natural efficacious sustainable competitor.


Bruno





Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:54, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/19/2014 1:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 19 Apr 2014, at 08:42, Samiya Illias wrote:

The harmful effects of the consumption of intoxicants for the  
individual and its consequent effects on society are observable.  
The bans are in thus in the larger interest.



This does not follow. Banning intoxicant augments the intoxicant  
consumption, and so, if that is bad, it leads to the contrary  
effect than the one desired.


Even if it suppresses the consumption of something that is bad for  
you (e.g. tobacco smoking) the actions necessary for suppression:  
searches, police surveillance, fines, imprisonment - may be worse  
than the effects of consumption.


Yes. cannabis prohibition has destroyed much life than cannabis would  
ever did if it could have been remained legal.


Bruno





Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:48, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/19/2014 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 19 Apr 2014, at 00:52, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/18/2014 7:13 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
What society thinks has nothing to do with it, because weak  
correlation-based scientific evidence is used selectively to  
create laws that were desired a priori by some interest group.
That implies some nefarious motive and corrupt use of data known  
to be wrong.  In fact there was no nefarious 'interest group' that  
wanted to ban marijuana or to ban alcohol or to ban heroin.



What? For marijuana, there were a lot. Anslinger was asked to find  
eveidence that cannabis was worst than alcohol. he destoyed the  
results which showed that cannabis is much less dangerous than  
alcohol. Nixon, Chirac (in France), adn also  people in the  
UK, will destroyed such records too.


It is a made up since the start. That is why some people still  
speculate on dangers, for which there are no corresponding  
complains, with very few exception by person who abuse, and would  
probably not in case it would be legal.




All these bans were initiated by people who believed in the ill  
effects of these substances for individuals and for society.


I have no clue why you say this.


Because it's true.  The people may have been mistaken - particularly  
about the net ill effects on society - but there is plenty of 
evidence that some people become addicted to pot just as they become  
addicted to alcohol or tobacco and this has bad consequences for them.


Sure. But it is the illegality which makes that into a problem. In The  
Netherlands,  a kid is very badly seen by his peers when stoned, and  
considered as a total idiot when abusing pot. but where pot is  
illegal, he is seen as a sort of hero. The numbers confirms this. The  
Netherlands is the country were kids smoke pots the less, and  
countries with severe repression are those where kids smoke the most.




For example, my wife's first husband became a habitual pot smoker  
and lost all ambition and interest in other things.


One case is not a statistics. I might doubt if he  lost all ambition  
and interest because of pot, or if he became a pot abuser because  he  
lost all ambition and interest, for some different reason.


When I was a young teacher, being still brainwashed, I was dramatizing  
when kids were "druggy", and unconsciously provided to pot the  
justification of the kids problem. But then I realize that by saying  
something like "smoke as much as you want but don't use that as a  
pretext to not study for the exams" was much more productive. They  
stopped the druggy play when I stopped to see them as druggie, but  
just as lazy kids searching reason to not study.




And even aside from such effects, there has been a strong Puritan  
ethic in the U.S. that thinks of any kind of sybaritic pleasure as  
sinful and bad for one's character.


Yes. That is part of the problem, perhaps even more so for protestants  
than catholics which have the right to take as much fun in whatever  
they want as long as they confess to the local "authority" (!).


I tend to believe the contrary. It is a quasi "duty" to enjoy life  
fully, as long as we don't interfere with other people ways to enjoy  
themselves. Pseudo-religion uses sin as a manipulative tool. The  
christian message according to which we have to love god, or to fear  
him is everything but religious. It is an inconsistent psychological  
constraint making impossible to develop genuine love.


Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 April 2014 22:41, Kim Jones  wrote:

>
> Everything we know
> Everything we know that we know
> Everything we do not know
> Everything we suspect we do not know
> Everything we cannot possibly know (due to the limitations of hominid
> brains/minds)
> Everything that was, is or will be
>

In short, God is - wait for it:


> The Everything.
>

I don't have any problem with calling this God, or indeed calling it
whatever you like, but it isn't the concept most people have of God.

Maybe you should just call it the Everything.

>
>
The Everything cannot possibly have a name nor an identity.
>

"The Tao that can be named..."

Most people think God has an identity. God is love, or my God is a jealous
God, or whatever. So your conception of God isn't what we were talking
about.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Telmo Menezes

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

>
> On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:48, meekerdb wrote:
>
>  On 4/19/2014 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
>  On 19 Apr 2014, at 00:52, meekerdb wrote:
>
>  On 4/18/2014 7:13 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
> What society thinks has nothing to do with it, because weak
> correlation-based scientific evidence is used selectively to create laws
> that were desired a priori by some interest group.
>
> That implies some nefarious motive and corrupt use of data known to be
> wrong.  In fact there was no nefarious 'interest group' that wanted to ban
> marijuana or to ban alcohol or to ban heroin.
>
>
>
>  What? For marijuana, there were a lot. Anslinger was asked to find
> eveidence that cannabis was worst than alcohol. he destoyed the results
> which showed that cannabis is much less dangerous than alcohol. Nixon,
> Chirac (in France), adn also people in the UK, will destroyed such records
> too.
>
>  It is a made up since the start. That is why some people still speculate
> on dangers, for which there are no corresponding complains, with very few
> exception by person who abuse, and would probably not in case it would be
> legal.
>
>
>
>  All these bans were initiated by people who believed in the ill effects
> of these substances for individuals and for society.
>
>
>  I have no clue why you say this.
>
>
> Because it's true.  The people may have been mistaken - particularly about
> the net ill effects on society - but there is plenty of evidence that some
> people become addicted to pot just as they become addicted to alcohol or
> tobacco and this has bad consequences for them.
>
>
> Sure. But it is the illegality which makes that into a problem. In The
> Netherlands,  a kid is very badly seen by his peers when stoned, and
> considered as a total idiot when abusing pot. but where pot is illegal, he
> is seen as a sort of hero. The numbers confirms this. The Netherlands is
> the country were kids smoke pots the less, and countries with severe
> repression are those where kids smoke the most.
>
>
>
> For example, my wife's first husband became a habitual pot smoker and lost
> all ambition and interest in other things.
>
>
> One case is not a statistics. I might doubt if he  lost all ambition and
> interest because of pot, or if he became a pot abuser because  he lost all
> ambition and interest, for some different reason.
>

Yes. This was the point I was trying to make with ghibbsa before he took
offense.

Notice the cultural biases: it is common to tell the story of someone who
"starts drinking" because something in their life is not going well*. With
illegal substances we assume causality the other way around: someone's life
is not going well because of some drug. Even with substances that most
people don't see as "drugs", like sugar, the bias is displayed. Here we
have the archetype of the woman who gets fat from eating too much chocolate
or ice cream because her boyfriend left her. If we replace chocolate with
cannabis, then people assume that the boyfriend left her because she became
a pothead.

Prohibition reinforces the bias because successful people are not usually
at liberty to discuss their illegal drug use. We make a curious exception
for artists, but that's all.

Of course none of this falsifies the hypothesis that the guy lost ambition
and interest in other things because of his pot habit. It just tells us
that we should remain agnostic on causality, unless we gain a deeper
understanding of the neurochemical mechanisms involved.

* to be fair, in some cases people also claim alcohol as the cause of
problems, but the point is that causality is not automatically assumed with
legal substances, but is automatically assumed with illegal ones. This
strikes me as strong evidence of an irrational bias in our culture.


>
> When I was a young teacher, being still brainwashed, I was dramatizing
> when kids were "druggy", and unconsciously provided to pot the
> justification of the kids problem. But then I realize that by saying
> something like "smoke as much as you want but don't use that as a pretext
> to not study for the exams" was much more productive. They stopped the
> druggy play when I stopped to see them as druggie, but just as lazy kids
> searching reason to not study.
>
>
>
> And even aside from such effects, there has been a strong Puritan ethic in
> the U.S. that thinks of any kind of sybaritic pleasure as sinful and bad
> for one's character.
>
>
> Yes. That is part of the problem, perhaps even more so for protestants
> than catholics which have the right to take as much fun in whatever they
> want as long as they confess to the local "authority" (!).
>
> I tend to believe the contrary. It is a quasi "duty" to enjoy life fully,
> as long as we don't interfere with other people ways to enjoy themselves.
> Pseudo-religion uses sin as a manipulative tool. The christian message
> according to which we have to love god, or to fear him is everything but
>

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


It's just that we simply cannot read one's soul, but can judge behavior. The 
Christians, for example, not so long ago performed imperialist violence, for 
stated national interests, but the Churches never objected to this. So, 
judgmentally, we can say that the behavior of the religious, in Europe was 
useless, or approving, of their government's behavior. Behaviorally, again, 
they were malefactors, if you needed a non-Islamic example. Right now, to this 
hour, there is no opposition to Jihadist actions from amongst the Ummah. 
Perhaps it will happen soon? Perhaps centuries in arrival. Nobody is marching 
in the streets, amongst the faithful, in opposing the great Jihad in the 
attempt to restore the Caliphate, to impose shariah. The faithful are either 
uncaring, fatalistic, fearful of retribution, or support the jihad. Yes, there 
are always fanatics within religions, but now it's only one that has set their 
sites on the world.  It's a real problem and not a false complaint or 
accusation. 


-Original Message-
From: Samiya Illias 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sat, Apr 19, 2014 11:15 pm
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Chris, I was replying to Spudboy100 who refuses to consider the Quran because 
of the 'jihadis' 'behavoir' . The point I was trying to make is that some 
people, from all religious persuasions, do strange and at times horrible 
things. We need to look past people and their behaviours, and examine the 
religious texts to evaluate for ourselves what it is. We are all responsible 
for our own beliefs and actions. We come to this world alone, we will leave it 
alone. What religious label we are born in, which religious label or not we 
choose, eventually we all must face death alone, and whatever's beyond that. 
Wishing it away because some people are poor ambassadors or poor communicators 
of the message, won't change things according to our wishes. We humans have 
intelligence and a vast wondrous world full of thoughts and ideas and science 
and signs... we must explore everything we can for its own merit before 
discarding it. 
On this Everything list, I see earnest seekers exploring almost everything, but 
somehow they stop short of scripture, especially Quran. I understand much of 
this has to do with a filtered view of history, long-held prejudices, popular 
media, as well as the actions of people who poorly understand or use the 
religion, etc. The thing is, to understand everything, we must be willing to 
explore everything. 


To answer your question, you may find these versions of history different from 
what you may know about Muslim conquests: 
http://lostislamichistory.com/did-islam-spread-by-the-sword/   
http://lostislamichistory.com/?s=crusades 

http://lostislamichistory.com/the-crusades-part-3-liberation/ 



Samiya 




On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Chris de Morsella  
wrote:


Samiya – Has Islam never participated in perpetrating violence against others; 
in conquest? 
Islam is as guilty as the other Abrahamic faiths, as an agent of violence in 
human history. 
Chris
 
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:57 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com


Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



 

People do many strange and horrid things in the name of religion or nation or 
some other pretext. Violence has been perpetrated by the Crusaders, by the 
Nazis, by the Buddhists in Bhutan, by the Hindus in the Kashmir, Babri Masjid, 
by the Jews in Palestine, the Soviets in Afghanistan, the US and Allies in 
Iraq, and the list goes on... 

One must look beyond the people and evaluate religions for their message.  

 

Samiya  

 

spudboy100 wrote: Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what happens 
to humans in this world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to an ecstatic, 
plunge into violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning person may pause, and 
ponder what is lost, what is gained, and what is the damage done? Rather than 
focus on the internal realm of self, I concentrate, for now, on behavior. 

 

 


 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:26 PM,  wrote:

Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what happens to humans in this 
world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to an ecstatic, plunge into 
violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning person may pause, and ponder what 
is lost, what is gained, and what is the damage done? Rather than focus on the 
internal realm of self, I concentrate, for now, on behavior.  



There are many 'interesting' things to learn about Islam only if one is willing 
to look beyond the prejudices. 

The more one studies and contemplates on the Quran and the world, the more one 
falls in love with God. It is intoxicating, it's an amazing feeling! 



-Original Message-


From: Samiya Illias 
To: everything-list 


Sent: Sat, Apr 19, 2014 11:10 am
Subject: Re:

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Weinberg is wrong, Liz. It might have been an affront to Weinberg's dignity if 
and when he tried it, but not everybody. Weinberg might agree with the 
statement that, let us say, Transhumanism, or the Universal Dovetailer Argument 
is also such an indignity. I don't know why Weinberg would, but he might. There 
are religious scientists and engineers all over the place, so are they 
subjected to a great indignity? Who shall save them of this suffering, that 
they, themselves, are obviously, having no luck in letting go of?  Just because 
Weinberg hates banana daiquiris, does not mean that I should.  

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good 
people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people 
to do evil things, that takes religion.

-- Steven Weinberg




-Original Message-
From: LizR 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 12:59 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good 
people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people 
to do evil things, that takes religion.

-- Steven Weinberg




On 20 April 2014 16:54, meekerdb  wrote:

  

On 4/19/2014 9:01 PM, Samiya Illias  wrote:


  

  

  
Including Uri Geller, UFOs, a thousand people whowant to "prove 
Einstein wrong", Borley Rectory, thepeople trying to sell me 
something from Nigeria, theLoch Ness monster, Ouija boards, 
Thor, Zeus, Odin and soon - yes, no doubt one shouldn't dismiss 
anything, butlife's too short not to prioritise. 

  

  
  

  
  
Too short, yes! Prioritize, yes!  Especially because if thereis a 
purpose to this life, and especially if there is more tolife after 
death, and if this short life is but a test, whoseresult is eternal, 
then we better study earnestly. Difficult,yes, impossible, no! 



  "It's an incredible con job when you think of it, to believe  
something now in exchange for life after death. Even corporations  with all 
their reward systems don't try to make it posthumous."
   Gloria Steinem, women's rights activist
  


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.





-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


You are closest to Frank Tipler, or astronomer, Bernard Carr, on this matter. 
Or, for that matter Michio Kaku, if you read his latest book. 

I differ on Einstein in that I do believe theology has a large part which can 
be made into science. Here I am closer to Gödel than to Einstein. 


Bruno




-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 7:28 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.




On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:12, LizR wrote:



On 20 April 2014 18:42, Samiya Illias  wrote:
 

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
 
-Albert Einstein 







He then went on to say...
 
The letter states pretty clearly that Einstein was by no means a religious 
person - in fact, the great physicist saw religion as no more than a "childish 
superstition". "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and 
product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still 
primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no 
matter how subtle can (for me) change this", Einstein wrote.





I really would like to suggest you reading the quite deep book by Jammer on 
"Einstein's religion"(*). 


You have to be careful when quoting Einstein on this. I think Einstein was very 
deeply and authentically religious, like Gödel. 
Like often in such case, such person are also the most shocked by the 
institutionalized religion, and very often Einstein made clear that his 
condemnation of religion relate to that. All his life Einstein insisted that he 
is a believer, and that he despises the atheists and so called free-thinker, 
but also all the churches and religious institution. 


I would say that the more you genuinely believe in God, the more you are 
shocked by what humans do with the notion.


I differ on Einstein in that I do believe theology has a large part which can 
be made into science. Here I am closer to Gödel than to Einstein. 


Bruno


http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Religion-Theology-Max-Jammer/dp/069110297X


A good amazon abstract:
<>










 





 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



 



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


At some point, you might consider, expounding on this concept of Comp, how it 
does what it does, and how it informs both science and theology. I didn't 
capture this in your recent book. 

Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to be a 
Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)




-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 7:40 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.




On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:



On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
 


So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered through 
divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
 



The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and contemplation 
you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search and find faith. 




 To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?






Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to be a 
Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)


But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As answer that 
is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search" attitude, i.e. the God of 
the gap, maintained by those who want you to believe in their view on reality, 
and prevent you to search and question them.


God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most good one. 
At least not in any public way.


Bruno






So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question back a 
step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or Max Tegmark's 
mathematical universe hypothesis.
 






 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



 



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Telmo Menezes

Since the list is in a proselytizing mood -- I guess it's appropriate for
the season -- I leave you my favourite religious book.

"Principia Discordia"

or

"How I found Goddess and What I did to Her when I found Her"

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/downloads/Principia%20Discordia.pdf
(the good stuff starts on page 28)

The good news is that, in Discordianism, we are all Popes.

Hail Eris!
Telmo.


On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

>
> On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:
>
> On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>
>> So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered
>> through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
>>
>> The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and
>> contemplation you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search
>> and find faith.
>>
>
> To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?
>
>
>
> Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to
> be a Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)
>
> But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As answer
> that is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search" attitude, i.e.
> the God of the gap, maintained by those who want you to believe in their
> view on reality, and prevent you to search and question them.
>
> God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most good
> one. At least not in any public way.
>
> Bruno
>
>
> So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question
> back a step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or
> Max Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Samiya Illias

 Liz, Pascal's wager is not good enough. Its not as simple as placing a
bet. We are fairly warned that those who claim to be Muslims will be tried
and tested. To hear how Yusuf Estes was tested: Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTIBC80cBAQ

Relevant verses:
[Quran 29:2] Do people think that they will be left alone because they say:
"We believe," and will not be tested
[Quran 76:2] Lo! We create human from a drop of thickened fluid to test
him; so We make him hearing, knowing

Samiya


On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 9:24 AM, LizR  wrote:

> On 20 April 2014 16:01, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 8:34 AM, LizR  wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 April 2014 15:15, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>>>
 Chris, I was replying to Spudboy100 who refuses to consider the Quran
 because of the 'jihadis' 'behavoir' . The point I was trying to make is
 that some people, from all religious persuasions, do strange and at times
 horrible things. We need to look past people and their behaviours, and
 examine the religious texts to evaluate for ourselves what it is. We are
 all responsible for our own beliefs and actions. We come to this world
 alone, we will leave it alone. What religious label we are born in, which
 religious label or not we choose, eventually we all must face death alone,
 and whatever's beyond that. Wishing it away because some people are poor
 ambassadors or poor communicators of the message, won't change things
 according to our wishes. We humans have intelligence and a vast wondrous
 world full of thoughts and ideas and science and signs... we must explore
 everything we can for its own merit before discarding it.
 On this Everything list, I see earnest seekers exploring almost
 everything, but somehow they stop short of scripture, especially Quran. I
 understand much of this has to do with a filtered view of history,
 long-held prejudices, popular media, as well as the actions of people who
 poorly understand or use the religion, etc.

>>>
>>> This is, at least in my case, due to a distrust of taking the authority
>>> of centuries-old texts when there is little to no evidence that any of them
>>> contain more than - at best - a slight grain of truth, and when from a
>>> present day perspective it is clear they were created for reasons well
>>> understood by psychologists (in particular, for social control).
>>>
>>>
 The thing is, to understand everything, we must be willing to explore
 everything.

>>>
>>> Including Uri Geller, UFOs, a thousand people who want to "prove
>>> Einstein wrong", Borley Rectory, the people trying to sell me something
>>> from Nigeria, the Loch Ness monster, Ouija boards, Thor, Zeus, Odin and so
>>> on - yes, no doubt one shouldn't dismiss anything, but life's too short not
>>> to prioritise.
>>>
>>
>> Too short, yes! Prioritize, yes!  Especially because if there is a
>> purpose to this life, and especially if there is more to life after death,
>> and if this short life is but a test, whose result is eternal, then we
>> better study earnestly. Difficult, yes, impossible, no!
>>
>> Hmm. Pascal's wager, no less.
>

> So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered
> through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
>



>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Ok, I didn't really read it carefully, because:
a) I am lazy
b) I am at work now. 
Both of these are good excuses, and I shall use them now. So my evaluation of 
Discordia is one word, Apostasy! Why is this an apostasy? Because:
a) It is Easter Sunday.
b) It is fun to yell out the word, Apostasy!

I did like Robert  Anton Wilson's writings,  in previous years, and it's good 
to see that his work is remembered. 



-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 9:36 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Since the list is in a proselytizing mood -- I guess it's appropriate for the 
season -- I leave you my favourite religious book.


"Principia Discordia"


or


"How I found Goddess and What I did to Her when I found Her"


http://www.principiadiscordia.com/downloads/Principia%20Discordia.pdf

(the good stuff starts on page 28)


The good news is that, in Discordianism, we are all Popes.


Hail Eris!
Telmo.




On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:




On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:



On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
 


So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered through 
divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
 



The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and contemplation 
you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search and find faith. 




 To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?







Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to be a 
Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)


But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As answer that 
is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search" attitude, i.e. the God of 
the gap, maintained by those who want you to believe in their view on reality, 
and prevent you to search and question them.


God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most good one. 
At least not in any public way.


Bruno






So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question back a 
step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or Max Tegmark's 
mathematical universe hypothesis.
 






 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.




 
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



 




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.





-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 12:33, Kim Jones wrote:




On 19 Apr 2014, at 2:15 am, Bruno Marchal  wrote:



On 18 Apr 2014, at 11:02, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:



and that it can exacerbate or precipitate psychosis in patients  
who already have schizophrenia.


I agree. I might think that this is a good thing, as it will point  
on the problem and help to manage a treatment. In some case  
cannabis can be enough as a treatment; in other case cannabis would  
be not indicated and should be avoided.


Personally, I don't think that cannabis, nor tobacco, should be  
allowed, without medical prescription, to minors. But to make it  
illegal to sell it to a minor, you have to legalize it.


For adult, I do think that recreational cannabis is *far* safer  
than alcohol, on many level (from the liver to the social problem  
or the car crash).


Bruno



Cannabis makes the user more sensitive to inputs of all kinds. It  
kind of invokes an enormous range of qualia which can be disturbing  
to some subjects. When stoned, you have intense reactions to  
whatever you are presented with. The well-known feeling of paranoia  
that often accompanies this is IMO the brain's natural panic  
reaction to having so many parallel streams of qualia maxed-out at  
the same time.



I wish this is true, but it is hard to dismantle it from the fact that  
the "fruit is forbidden". I think the panic reaction occurs with  
people who can't let it go and want to control everything.




This is normal under the circumstances and why I insist that  
cannabis use must be ritualised. Consider what a ritual is: a series  
of actions performed in a special space at a special time with like- 
minded participants all of whom understand the process involved. You  
undergo the experience in a protected space. To become stoned  
amongst people who are not is a very dangerous thing to do because  
the others will almost certainly make an uninformed judgement about  
your behaviour.



I would separate the entheogenic use of cannabis from its recreative  
use. A well known fact is that after years of consumption of cannabis,  
it becomes essentially a relaxant time-slowing machine. The  
entheogenic "teaching" get null. Its medicinal virtues continues,  
though. It remains better compared to most legal tranquilizers or  
antidepressant products.






The euphoric mind senses this, even though in an altered state of  
consciousness, and paranoia is the result, because the mind feels  
helpless when faced with the threat of outsiders who may be negative  
toward the altered state you are in.


If only alcoholic could be like that!



Therefore, cannabis use is best confined to the "indoors" sensory  
experiences that you can either do alone or with a few trusted  
friends. Reading, writing, cooking, eating, listening to or creating/ 
performing music, painting, sculpting - anything creative that does  
not involve much movement through space are all suitable activities.  
The king-daddy experience of them all is, of course, sex.


OK.




Unsuitable experiences would be driving a car, ascending in a hot-  
air balloon etc. this last was the fate of a group last year in New  
Zealand (Liz may recall this) where the entire group got stoned  
whilst aloft. When something went wrong with the mechanism of the  
helium delivery to the burner, nobody was in a baseline state of  
consciousness able to perform the necessary actions to save the  
situation and the result was that all perished in a fireball.


If they all perished, how to you know that nobody was in a baseline  
state of consciousness able to perform the needed actions?


I certainly not applaud the idea of doing that, but I am not sure  
about your inference. There are many accidents with balloon, sometimes  
even with sober people.







This is the antithesis of ritualised action performed in a protected  
space.


Accidents are due to irresponsibility, not products.

Common sense indicates to not alter your mind when you know you will  
have to use it, but irresponsible people will get the accident, in any  
possible ways.




I love cannabis myself, but I am the first to proclaim that a stoned  
driver is quite as dangerous as a drunk driver.



I never said that I love cannabis, to be precise. I might have said  
that I love salvia. But salvia is quite different and is actually sort  
of anti-drug, including cannabis.


And now, my dear Kim, I am not sure about any problem about driving  
and cannabis. Again, when you look at the literature, you can see many  
papers showing that cannabis is dangerous when driving, but when you  
do the math, there are simply wrong. Their numbers proves nothing.
Yet two serious studies have been done, in France and in the  
Netherlands, and have concluded, astonishingly enough, that cannabis  
use diminishes the number of car accidents. Eventually an explanation  
is that young smoker - young driver are to paranoid to take the car,  
or are even unable t

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 12:41, Kim Jones wrote:




On 20 Apr 2014, at 6:16 pm, LizR  wrote:


To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?


The problem is solved once and for all when we cease this ridiculous  
game of imagining God to be a being or an entity. God is not a being  
or an entity. God is a concept. God is:


Everything we know
Everything we know that we know
Everything we do not know
Everything we suspect we do not know
Everything we cannot possibly know (due to the limitations of  
hominid brains/minds)

Everything that was, is or will be

In short, God is - wait for it:

The Everything. The Everything cannot possibly have a name nor an  
identity.


I can agree with this, with the open mind if that everything is a  
person or not, has a will or not, reflects itself in itself or not, etc.


It is truth which attracts us, although in some state of mind we can  
fear that too. It is mainly an unknown, even if computationalism  
simplifies the picture conceptually, because ontologically the  
"everything" can be only 0, s(0), s(s(0)), etc. (or K, S, KK, KS,  
SK, ...). The rest are infinities of dreams which recovers, or not, in  
the transfinite (which exists from the inside or internal relative  
view).


Like God, or Sense, Everything is still a word. It does not tell us  
what it is, nor where that comes from.


The comparison/identification between God, Everything, is interesting  
only as far as it helps us also to better understand the theologian,  
and the mystical or altered mind state reports. In this case perhaps  
everything is more like the NOùS. In Plotinus (and comp through the  
lexicon) the noùs is still an emanation of something simpler, the one.


But that is just some nuance. The only God who has clearly a will, is  
the Universal Soul, the third hypostase, which is also the universal  
person (in Heaven, I think, with []p & p, and on earth, With []p & p &  
<>t (I would say)).


Bruno





Kim




Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL

Email:   kimjo...@ozemail.com.au
 kmjco...@icloud.com
Mobile: 0450 963 719
Phone:  02 93894239
Web: http://www.eportfolio.kmjcommp.com


"Never let your schooling get in the way of your education" - Mark  
Twain




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 15:09, Telmo Menezes wrote:





On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Bruno Marchal   
wrote:


On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:48, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/19/2014 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 19 Apr 2014, at 00:52, meekerdb wrote:


On 4/18/2014 7:13 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
What society thinks has nothing to do with it, because weak  
correlation-based scientific evidence is used selectively to  
create laws that were desired a priori by some interest group.
That implies some nefarious motive and corrupt use of data known  
to be wrong.  In fact there was no nefarious 'interest group'  
that wanted to ban marijuana or to ban alcohol or to ban heroin.



What? For marijuana, there were a lot. Anslinger was asked to find  
eveidence that cannabis was worst than alcohol. he   
destoyed the results which showed that cannabis is much less  
dangerous than alcohol. Nixon, Chirac (in France), adn also people  
in the UK, will destroyed such records too.


It is a made up since the start. That is why some people still  
speculate on dangers, for which there are no corresponding  
complains, with very few exception by person who abuse, and would  
probably not in case it would be legal.




All these bans were initiated by people who believed in the ill  
effects of these substances for individuals and for society.


I have no clue why you say this.


Because it's true.  The people may have been mistaken -  
particularly about the net ill effects on society - but there is  
plenty of evidence that some people become addicted to pot just as  
they become addicted to alcohol or tobacco and this has bad  
consequences for them.


Sure. But it is the illegality which makes that into a problem. In  
The Netherlands,  a kid is very badly seen by his peers when stoned,  
and considered as a total idiot when abusing pot. but where pot is  
illegal, he is seen as a sort of hero. The numbers confirms this.  
The Netherlands is the country were kids smoke pots the less, and  
countries with severe repression are those where kids smoke the most.




For example, my wife's first husband became a habitual pot smoker  
and lost all ambition and interest in other things.


One case is not a statistics. I might doubt if he  lost all ambition  
and interest because of pot, or if he became a pot abuser because   
he lost all ambition and interest, for some different reason.


Yes. This was the point I was trying to make with ghibbsa before he  
took offense.


Notice the cultural biases: it is common to tell the story of  
someone who "starts drinking" because something in their life is not  
going well*. With illegal substances we assume causality the other  
way around: someone's life is not going well because of some drug.  
Even with substances that most people don't see as "drugs", like  
sugar, the bias is displayed. Here we have the archetype of the  
woman who gets fat from eating too much chocolate or ice cream  
because her boyfriend left her. If we replace chocolate with  
cannabis, then people assume that the boyfriend left her because she  
became a pothead.


It is always a confusion between "a in b" and "b in a", when you look  
close. It explains why cultural prejudices are easy to create, and  
hard to revise. In the short run, if you have to act, that confusion  
can be helpful, and our associative memories exploits this. If you are  
raped by a guy 42 km high, you will fear all guy 42 km high, by a  
simple association, which is not a logical valid one, but locally it  
makes sense.







Prohibition reinforces the bias because successful people are not  
usually at liberty to discuss their illegal drug use. We make a  
curious exception for artists, but that's all.


Of course none of this falsifies the hypothesis that the guy lost  
ambition and interest in other things because of his pot habit.


Indeed.





It just tells us that we should remain agnostic on causality,



Absolutely. In all domains, on all matter. But we can try theories.  
Causalities are well captured in modal logic by expression like [](p- 
>q). There are transfinities of different modal logics, but there are  
as much notion of causality.




unless we gain a deeper understanding of the neurochemical  
mechanisms involved.


There is also a nocebo effect. If someone has already a tendency of  
being lazy, and is told that cannabis makes people lazy, he might use  
cannabis to explain (and most plausibly aggravate) his laziness. To  
find an easy culprit which deviates from its original laziness.







* to be fair, in some cases people also claim alcohol as the cause  
of problems, but the point is that causality is not automatically  
assumed with legal substances, but is automatically assumed with  
illegal ones. This strikes me as strong evidence of an irrational  
bias in our culture.


People want to hear what other people want them to want to hear. I am  
not sure it is just our culture. It is very general, a

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.



On 20 Apr 2014, at 15:31, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:

At some point, you might consider, expounding on this concept of  
Comp, how it does what it does, and how it informs both science and  
theology. I didn't capture this in your recent book.


OK. I might give a longer response some day, but I have to go and will  
just refer to both the sane paper (easily accessible, and it contains  
both UDA and AUDA), and the relation with (neoplatonist) theology is  
in the plotinus paper (pdf)


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html 
 (HTML)


+

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/CiE2007/SIENA.pdf
(PDF).



My liking that God has a Mother should not be taken too much  
seriously, and is related to my liking attributing the feminine to  
even numbers, and a the masculine to the odd numbers, and then it is a  
remind that the one (1) is enclosed by the most terrible female in the  
arithmetical platonia, the number 0 (death, annihilation, nothing),  
and 2 (life, division, separation, distinction, creation).
We tend to believe that God is male, because we forget that the ONE  
came from the ZERO (by the successor operation of course).


:)

Bruno


Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it  
has to be a Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain  
salts :)

-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 7:40 am
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:


On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean  
discovered through divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?


The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and  
contemplation you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather  
search and find faith.


To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?



Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it  
has to be a Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain  
salts :)


But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As  
answer that is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search"  
attitude, i.e. the God of the gap, maintained by those who want you  
to believe in their view on reality, and prevent you to search and  
question them.


God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most  
good one. At least not in any public way.


Bruno



So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the  
question back a step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory  
of nothing" or Max Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything- 
l...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.


Thanks, Professor. You musings about God having a mother using logical 
consistencies is similar to what mathematical biologist and author, Clifford 
Pickover does frequently in his books, both fact and fiction.  Perhaps God's 
Mother was a Boltzmann Brain? Ah! Another mystery infused with a mystery. 

Mitch

My liking that God has a Mother should not be taken too much seriously, and is 
related to my liking attributing the feminine to even numbers, and a the 
masculine to the odd numbers, and then it is a remind that the one (1) is 
enclosed by the most terrible female in the arithmetical platonia, the number 0 
(death, annihilation, nothing), and 2 (life, division, separation, distinction, 
creation). 
We tend to believe that God is male, because we forget that the ONE came from 
the ZERO (by the successor operation of course).


:)


Bruno




-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.




On 20 Apr 2014, at 15:31, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:


 
At some point, you might consider, expounding on this concept of Comp, how it 
does what it does, and how it informs both science and theology. I didn't 
capture this in your recent book. 



OK. I might give a longer response some day, but I have to go and will just 
refer to both the sane paper (easily accessible, and it contains both UDA and 
AUDA), and the relation with (neoplatonist) theology is in the plotinus paper 
(pdf)



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html  
   (HTML)



+


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/CiE2007/SIENA.pdf   (PDF).




My liking that God has a Mother should not be taken too much seriously, and is 
related to my liking attributing the feminine to even numbers, and a the 
masculine to the odd numbers, and then it is a remind that the one (1) is 
enclosed by the most terrible female in the arithmetical platonia, the number 0 
(death, annihilation, nothing), and 2 (life, division, separation, distinction, 
creation). 
We tend to believe that God is male, because we forget that the ONE came from 
the ZERO (by the successor operation of course).


:)


Bruno




 
 
Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to be a 
Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)
 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-
 From: Bruno Marchal 
 To: everything-list 
 Sent: Sun, Apr 20, 2014 7:40 am
 Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.
 
 
 

 
 
On 20 Apr 2014, at 10:16, LizR wrote:
 

 
 
 
On 20 April 2014 18:52, Samiya Illias  wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
So which of the 1000s of Gods people have invented, I mean discovered through 
divine revelation, should one bet on (and why) ?
 

 
 
 
 The one that you truly believe in, based upon all the study and contemplation 
you can put in. Not bet upon any arbitrarily, rather search and find faith. 
 
 
 

 
 
 To me, god is a non-answer. Where did god come from?
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
Good question. Apparently in comp God might have a Mother, and it has to be a 
Goddess, but take this with the usual amount of grain salts :)
 

 
 
But God, nor his Mother, should ever be considered as an answer. As answer that 
is the usual authoritative "don't ask, don't search" attitude, i.e. the God of 
the gap, maintained by those who want you to believe in their view on reality, 
and prevent you to search and question them.
 

 
 
God is not an answer, nor a justification for any act, even the most good one. 
At least not in any public way.
 

 
 
Bruno
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
So far the only ontologies that don't seem to merely push the question back a 
step are ones like Bruno's comp, Russell's "theory of nothing" or Max Tegmark's 
mathematical universe hypothesis.
 

 
 
 
 
 


 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 
  
 
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 


 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-lis

RE: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 8:15 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

>> Chris, I was replying to Spudboy100 who refuses to consider the Quran 
>> because of the 'jihadis' 'behavoir' . The point I was trying to make is that 
>> some people, from all religious persuasions, do strange and at times 
>> horrible things. We need to look past people and their behaviours, and 
>> examine the religious texts to evaluate for ourselves what it is. We are all 
>> responsible for our own beliefs and actions. We come to this world alone, we 
>> will leave it alone. What religious label we are born in, which religious 
>> label or not we choose, eventually we all must face death alone, and 
>> whatever's beyond that. Wishing it away because some people are poor 
>> ambassadors or poor communicators of the message, won't change things 
>> according to our wishes. We humans have intelligence and a vast wondrous 
>> world full of thoughts and ideas and science and signs... we must explore 
>> everything we can for its own merit before discarding it. 

I agree we all must face death alone. The realization that our personal destiny 
is to die, to perish, to be forever gone… is exceedingly hard to accept and is 
the fuel that drives all faiths. 

On this Everything list, I see earnest seekers exploring almost everything, but 
somehow they stop short of scripture, especially Quran. I understand much of 
this has to do with a filtered view of history, long-held prejudices, popular 
media, as well as the actions of people who poorly understand or use the 
religion, etc. The thing is, to understand everything, we must be willing to 
explore everything. 

Samiya I am going to stand by my statement that Islam has also been spread by 
the sword. For example, the conquest of Sassanid Persia and the, that began 
with the conquest of Mesopotamia by Arab forces led by Khalid ibn Walidin 633 
AD. The Moghul conquest into India another example.

I am also aware of the golden age of Islam, and am especially in awe of Moorish 
Spain at its flowering height of poetry, thought, science, philosophy 
(including in its scope one of the most important flowering of Judaism and 
Jewish culture ever, a fact few Americans are aware of.)

Sure Islam suffered the Crusades, but, for example the Ottoman’s almost took 
Vienna and would have swept down through into the heartland of the Rhine river, 
if the logistical bottleneck of trying to provision their massive invasion 
force (it was huge even by modern standards) had not brought about supply 
collapse and plague onto its own forces. Christianity converted just as 
bloodily by the sword, all I am pointing out is that Islam – and Islamic 
underpinned empires such as the Ottoman or Moghul Empires have been just as 
enthusiastic in conquest as their Abrahamic cousins.

Chris

PS I will look at the links you gave.

To answer your question, you may find these versions of history different from 
what you may know about Muslim conquests: 

http://lostislamichistory.com/did-islam-spread-by-the-sword/   

http://lostislamichistory.com/?s=crusades 

http://lostislamichistory.com/the-crusades-part-3-liberation/ 

Samiya 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Chris de Morsella  
wrote:

Samiya – Has Islam never participated in perpetrating violence against others; 
in conquest? 

Islam is as guilty as the other Abrahamic faiths, as an agent of violence in 
human history. 

Chris

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:57 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

People do many strange and horrid things in the name of religion or nation or 
some other pretext. Violence has been perpetrated by the Crusaders, by the 
Nazis, by the Buddhists in Bhutan, by the Hindus in the Kashmir, Babri Masjid, 
by the Jews in Palestine, the Soviets in Afghanistan, the US and Allies in 
Iraq, and the list goes on... 

One must look beyond the people and evaluate religions for their message.  

Samiya  

spudboy100 wrote: Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what happens 
to humans in this world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to an ecstatic, 
plunge into violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning person may pause, and 
ponder what is lost, what is gained, and what is the damage done? Rather than 
focus on the internal realm of self, I concentrate, for now, on behavior. 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:26 PM,  wrote:

Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what happens to humans in this 
world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to an ecstatic, plunge into 
violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning person may pause, and pon

RE: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:54 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 4/19/2014 9:01 PM, Samiya Illias wrote:

Including Uri Geller, UFOs, a thousand people who want to "prove Einstein 
wrong", Borley Rectory, the people trying to sell me something from Nigeria, 
the Loch Ness monster, Ouija boards, Thor, Zeus, Odin and so on - yes, no doubt 
one shouldn't dismiss anything, but life's too short not to prioritise. 

Too short, yes! Prioritize, yes!  Especially because if there is a purpose to 
this life, and especially if there is more to life after death, and if this 
short life is but a test, whose result is eternal, then we better study 
earnestly. Difficult, yes, impossible, no! 

"It's an incredible con job when you think of it, to believe something now in 
exchange for life after death. Even corporations with all their reward systems 
don't try to make it posthumous."
 Gloria Steinem, women's rights activist

And how could it be otherwise… religion has always been a tool of the state to 
mind control the slaves with promises of rewards in the thereafter in exchange 
for loyalty, obedience and service throughout the span of actual life; balanced 
with threats of eternal damnation for falling out of line. The narrative of 
religion after religion seems tailor made, -- by their acts shall they be known 
-- for the imposition of the centralized authority totalitarian mindset. Marx 
got it right when he compared it to Opium; and I apologize for hurting anyone’s 
feelings who may believe in some deity or other. 

I think it is important to distinguish the pursuit of self-awareness, 
enlightenment, transcendence, spiritual self-realization… these are exquisitely 
personal acts and pursuits that have mostly been discouraged, frowned upon and 
often repressed by force and threat by the forces of organized religion. Free 
thinking and the spirit of questioning dogma is not something any religion 
tolerates (except in rare moments of flowering, say the Golden period of 
Moorish Cordoba)

Chris

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 2:54 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 Apr 2014, at 05:15, Samiya Illias wrote:

Chris, I was replying to Spudboy100 who refuses to consider the Quran
because of the 'jihadis' 'behavoir' . The point I was trying to make is that
some people, from all religious persuasions, do strange and at times
horrible things. We need to look past people and their behaviours, and
examine the religious texts to evaluate for ourselves what it is. We are all
responsible for our own beliefs and actions. We come to this world alone, we
will leave it alone. What religious label we are born in, which religious
label or not we choose, eventually we all must face death alone, and
whatever's beyond that. Wishing it away because some people are poor
ambassadors or poor communicators of the message, won't change things
according to our wishes. We humans have intelligence and a vast wondrous
world full of thoughts and ideas and science and signs... we must explore
everything we can for its own merit before discarding it. 

On this Everything list, I see earnest seekers exploring almost everything,
but somehow they stop short of scripture, especially Quran. I understand
much of this has to do with a filtered view of history, long-held
prejudices, popular media, as well as the actions of people who poorly
understand or use the religion, etc. The thing is, to understand everything,
we must be willing to explore everything. 

I read many "sacred" texts, including different translations of the Quran.
But I found some text more convincing, or more heart-vibrating than others.
I studied three years of classical chinese to be more at ease with the
taoist proses, notably.

For the Quran, some verses are formidable and can talk to my heart, but not
so for other verses, and muslim scholars were a bit contradictory on how to
interpret it.

>>But the main reason why we stop at scripture is only that they are
scripture. They are human very imperfect way to address the divine, and, by
my own faith, contradicts the deepest intuition I have on that matter, which
is that religion cannot be normative and allow "authorities" to think for
me, or intercede between me and the "good lord".

Precisely! This is my principal objection to all religions as well. No
authority is my bridge. the meaning of the Pope is in Italian "il Pontefice"
- e.g. "the One who is the bridge". the separation of the individual from
their own spiritual existence by means of this intercession of a central
gate keeper authority - i.e. the church (or equivalent) is at the root of
all religions, and especially of the Abrahamic monotheist brands.

Only the "i" that has the - perhaps one can say, self-emergent -- humility
to see (without imprisoning, what is seen, in pre-existing notional
constructs of the mind's world-model) can ever be the bridge to transcendent
self-awareness.

Chris

Some people seems to accept that "intercession", and I don't want to judge
them. May be it can make sense in some survival strategies, but it is no
more religion to me.

Bruno

To answer your question, you may find these versions of history different
from what you may know about Muslim conquests: 

http://lostislamichistory.com/did-islam-spread-by-the-sword/   

http://lostislamichistory.com/?s=crusades 

http://lostislamichistory.com/the-crusades-part-3-liberation/ 

Samiya 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Chris de Morsella 
wrote:

Samiya - Has Islam never participated in perpetrating violence against
others; in conquest? 

Islam is as guilty as the other Abrahamic faiths, as an agent of violence in
human history. 

Chris

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:57 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

People do many strange and horrid things in the name of religion or nation
or some other pretext. Violence has been perpetrated by the Crusaders, by
the Nazis, by the Buddhists in Bhutan, by the Hindus in the Kashmir, Babri
Masjid, by the Jews in Palestine, the Soviets in Afghanistan, the US and
Allies in Iraq, and the list goes on... 

One must look beyond the people and evaluate religions for their message.  

Samiya  

spudboy100 wrote: Well, I am more focused on human behavior, and what
happens to humans in this world. If such a spiritual intoxication leads to
an ecstatic, plunge into violence, a "holy" violence, then a reasoning
person may pause, and ponder what is lost, what is gained, and what is the
damage done? Rather than focus on the internal realm of self, I concentrate,
for now, on behavior. 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:26 PM,  wrote:

Well, I am mo

RE: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 5:01 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 20 April 2014 22:41, Kim Jones  wrote:

Everything we know

Everything we know that we know

Everything we do not know

Everything we suspect we do not know

Everything we cannot possibly know (due to the limitations of hominid 
brains/minds)

Everything that was, is or will be

In short, God is - wait for it:

The Everything. 

I don't have any problem with calling this God, or indeed calling it whatever 
you like, but it isn't the concept most people have of God.

Maybe you should just call it the Everything. 

The Everything cannot possibly have a name nor an identity.

"The Tao that can be named..."

Most people think God has an identity. God is love, or my God is a jealous God, 
or whatever. So your conception of God isn't what we were talking about.

The Jewish mystics of the Moorish flowering wrote of the Sephirot Kether (the 
crown) that it is that which is manifest, but cannot be defined, described or 
named. It is perhaps that ineffable sense of being that precedes and underlies 
our own perception of our self-being, but whatever…

Only one way to find out though, and that is to look for yourself, that is if 
you are lucky and wise and don’t fall for one or another of the well packaged 
stories that are seeking souls to corral.

Chris

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On the subject of the miracle of number 19 in the Qur'an, has anyone read
Martin Gardner's article on the miracle of the number 5 in the Empire State
Building?

(Or the not-such-a-miracle of pi in the great pyramid...)

With enough data and ingenuity and willing to not be too rigorous, one can
find number coincidences in anything.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread Samiya Illias

Liz, I gather from some of your posts that you're an author? Is it humanly
possible for you to author a book spread over 23 years, writing
'occasion/event-relevant' sentences, and then compiling it, such that the
book is tightly bound in a grid of a prime number, to protect it from any
alterations?


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:26 AM, LizR  wrote:

> On the subject of the miracle of number 19 in the Qur'an, has anyone read
> Martin Gardner's article on the miracle of the number 5 in the Empire State
> Building?
>
> (Or the not-such-a-miracle of pi in the great pyramid...)
>
> With enough data and ingenuity and willing to not be too rigorous, one can
> find number coincidences in anything.
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread meekerdb

On 4/20/2014 2:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:50, meekerdb wrote:

On 4/19/2014 12:37 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Then, the cultivation of industrial help -- which is not psychoactive -- was also made
illegal. Industrial has a wide range of applications: paper, fabric, building material
and cheap protein source, to name a few. It threatens several industries and it is not
a narcotic. How do you explain that?

How do you explain that growth of industrial hemp was encouraged by the government up
through World War 2? Did it not pose the same threats then?

Good question, but it seems to go in Telmo's direction. It shows that the banning of
hemp was indeed purely irrational, and motivated by making easy money based on lies. it
was only a way to impose oil and forest against a natural efficacious sustainable
competitor.

It can't be both. Making easy money is quite rational. But I don't know who you think led
the campaign to ban marijuana. It's my impression that it was a lot of self-righteous and
fearful conservative Christians who did not stand to gain anything monetarily - anymore
than they now stand to gain by preventing gay marriage. I don't see that going hemp was
any threat to the oil industry or lumber?

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread meekerdb


On 4/20/2014 5:00 AM, LizR wrote:
On 20 April 2014 22:41, Kim Jones > wrote:



Everything we know
Everything we know that we know
Everything we do not know
Everything we suspect we do not know
Everything we cannot possibly know (due to the limitations of hominid 
brains/minds)
Everything that was, is or will be


In short, God is - wait for it:


The Everything.


I don't have any problem with calling this God, or indeed calling it whatever you like, 
but it isn't the concept most people have of God.


Maybe you should just call it the Everything.


“People are more unwilling to give up the word ‘God’ than to give up the idea for which 
the word has hitherto stood”

--- Bertrand Russell

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 21 April 2014 16:27, meekerdb  wrote:

>  “People are more unwilling to give up the word ‘God’ than to give up
> the idea for which the word has hitherto stood”
> --- Bertrand Russell
>
> :-)

Indeed!

Even physicists have been getting some mileage out of it ("The God
Particle" etc).

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 21 April 2014 15:24, Samiya Illias  wrote:

> Liz, I gather from some of your posts that you're an author? Is it humanly
> possible for you to author a book spread over 23 years, writing
> 'occasion/event-relevant' sentences, and then compiling it, such that the
> book is tightly bound in a grid of a prime number, to protect it from any
> alterations?
>

Yes, of course it is, if a bunch of scholars treat it as a Holy book and
pore over it for centuries looking for such connections.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

On 21 April 2014 15:26, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 4/20/2014 2:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>  On 19 Apr 2014, at 20:50, meekerdb wrote:
> On 4/19/2014 12:37 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
> Then, the cultivation of industrial help -- which is not psychoactive --
> was also made illegal. Industrial has a wide range of applications: paper,
> fabric, building material and cheap protein source, to name a few. It
> threatens several industries and it is not a narcotic. How do you explain
> that?
>
>
> How do you explain that growth of industrial hemp was encouraged by the
> government up through World War 2?  Did it not pose the same threats then?
>
>
>  Good question, but it seems to go in Telmo's direction. It shows that
> the banning of hemp was indeed purely irrational, and motivated by making
> easy money based on lies. it was only a way to impose oil and forest
> against a natural efficacious sustainable competitor.
>
>  It can't be both. Making easy money is quite rational.  But I don't know
> who you think led the campaign to ban marijuana.  It's my impression that
> it was a lot of self-righteous and fearful conservative Christians who did
> not stand to gain anything monetarily - anymore than they now stand to gain
> by preventing gay marriage.  I don't see that going hemp was any threat to
> the oil industry or lumber?
>
> I don't know much about it but I would guess there were both a bunch of
self-interested people who stood to gain, and a load of righteously
indignant people who couldn't stand the idea that someone, somewhere might
be enjoying themselves.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.

2014-04-20 Thread meekerdb


On 4/20/2014 10:03 PM, LizR wrote:

On 21 April 2014 16:27, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

“People are more unwilling to give up the word ‘God’ than to give up 
the idea
for which the word has hitherto stood”
--- Bertrand Russell

:-)

Indeed!

Even physicists have been getting some mileage out of it ("The God Particle" 
etc).


Of course it's publishers, not authors, that chose titles.  I remember a well known author 
telling how, once when he had fallen on hard times he wrote a romance to be published 
under a house nome d'plume.  He called it "South Sea Interlude".  The publisher said they 
should call it "Captive of Temptation".  He objected that there was no captive in the 
story and it had nothing to do with temptation, so why should they call it "Captive of 
Temptation"?  The publisher patiently explained that if they called it "South Sea 
Interlude" it would sell 5000 copies.  If they called it "Captive of Temptation" it would 
sell 400,000 copies.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.