Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 27, 2011 - 06:25pm PT
|
Thank you Lennox, I see Los Alamos is number 6 richest.
All the richest seem to be east coast, Virginia.
Forgot why this came up......
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 27, 2011 - 06:27pm PT
|
Fructose!
Where you been? Nice to have you back on this thread.
Everything ok there in Iowa?
My parents were from the little farm town of Remsen, not far from Le Mars.
Spent some summers there on the family grain farms in the 1950s. I Love Iowa, where are you?
I still remember singing the Iowa rouser, "That's where the tall corn grows" !
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2011 - 06:35pm PT
|
Usually when people speak of the soul they make no reference to anything on which we can stand while considering the matter. Starting from Hawkeye's description of the "soul" I think it possible to discuss it.
At basis is it not a longing (nothing more) for something that persists? In Hawkeye's description each person really does not have their own private soul. It is something shared. The stars are there for all.
Actually when I think about it I wonder if religion as we know it only began when people began living in houses. They no longer so often looked up at night and were confronted by true immensity.
Since then, to an ever increasing degree, we have insulated ourselves from true immensity.
We are still doing it. Indeed going climbing is one way we edge back just a little closer to some immense questions.
Possible death/injury is one of the immense questions after all.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2011 - 11:30pm PT
|
As I understand it from eastern religions and those branches of Christianity that I identify with, the soul is our emotional self, and the seat of our intentions. In as much as our emotional life is formed by others when we are young children and involves interacting with others our whole life, it is social. In modern terminology it is the right brain or the unconscious mind. According to religion it is what determines our fate at death.
The spirit is a higher part of the mind and what is actually of the same essence as the consciousness behind the universe. Only a few people in this life ever glimpse their true spirit as they are so bogged down in the emotional garbage of the unconscious and their habitual reactions to that garbage..People go on retreats and live in monasteries in order to minimize their social interactions and emotions to try to see through to their spirit.
As for the idea that climbing and sleeping out of doors gets us back in touch with the infinite, I am completely agreed. Starting with agriculture, humans got the idea that they could control nature and lost their sense of awe. Modern science and technology has only heightened that trend. Just once in a while when something like an earthquake and tsunami wipe out large parts of a highly technical civilization, do we get reminded that humans really aren't in charge in the greater scheme of things. I've also observed that people who live in milder climates like California are particularly imbued with the idea of humans in control even compared to people who live in snowy climates with severe winters.
Another way of looking at climbers is that we are throwbacks to the Paleolithic, less adapted to the past 8,000 years of civilization than the norm for our species. Of course if the doomsayers are correct about peak oil and massive die offs, we will be the survivors after all.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2011 - 12:23am PT
|
Actually no ordinary person can ever accomplish anything like that. ^^^^
Thus they were most likely very advanced souls carrying and acting out these events under direction of the supreme superior for reasons us ordinary fools can not comprehend.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2011 - 12:30am PT
|
No Satan
God does everything ......
For a reason
And you can never know them all.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2011 - 12:50am PT
|
God does everything ......
Even everything the scientist is doing.
Nothing moves or happens without him moving it first ....
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2011 - 08:09am PT
|
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/07/how-the-universe-appeared-from-nothing.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news
both sides of the debate rest upon equally implausible claims: 1) creationists insist that SOMETHING existed before ANYTHING; 2) big bangers insist that EVERYTHING came from NOTHING
personally, i find the first implausibility easier to accept, accepting that there is/was something that we have not yet explained because it is beyond our understanding (like gravity was for so long)
the vid is seems to address the original implausibility but quickly moves away but, in so doing, actually belies its own assertion
"a system can never have precisely zero energy and since energy and mass are equivalent, pairs of particles can form spontaneously as long as they annihilate one another very quickly"
see the logical error? the assertion rests on the accepted idea that there is a "system" (ooooh, sounds like a design); well, a system is SOMETHING so the theory contradicts itself by admitting that the "system" already existed, therefore, there was no NOTHING to begin with
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2011 - 09:44am PT
|
big bangers insist that EVERYTHING came from NOTHING
"Big bangers" aren't insisting on anything.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2011 - 06:23pm PT
|
there is no nothing
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2011 - 08:17pm PT
|
there is no nothing
But the null set comes close enough for practical purposes.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 03:58pm PT
|
I will let Dogberry speak for me in a language adequate for creationists:
"Marry, sir, they have committed false report; moreover, they have spoken untruths; secondarily, they are slanders; sixth and lastly, they have belied a lady; thirdly, they have verified unjust things; and, to conclude, they are lying knaves."
|
|
cintune
climber
Midvale School for the Gifted
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 08:51pm PT
|
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 11:21pm PT
|
A very interesting new fossil has just been found.
Austrolopithecus sediba
Many scientists are proclaiming that this new Austrolopithecine find is the link between that species and the most archaic Homo line. If this is true, it will displace Homo habilis, the current candidate.
So far two skulls, a complete right hand, a foot and a two pelves have been found in a cave in South Africa.
The date is 1.977 years based on atomic dating methods from the strata just above the fossils.
The brain case is small like an Austrolopithecine and the frontal lobes show australopith-like convolutional patterns but also some foreshadowing of features of the human frontal lobes, such as posterior positioning of the olfactory bulbs. The bones of the eyes and face align most closely with human endocasts.
The hand presents a suite of Australopithecus-like features, such as a strong flexor apparatus associated with arboreal locomotion, and Homo-like features, such as a long thumb and short fingers associated with precision gripping and possibly stone tool use.
The ankle joint is mostly humanlike in form and there is some evidence for a humanlike arch and Achilles tendon. However, Au. sediba is also apelike in possessing more robust bones and a greater flexibility than expected. This seems to indicate that Au. sediba may have practiced a unique form of bipedalism and some degree of tree climbing.
The partial pelvis remains of both individuals were reconstructed. Again, these remains share some features with australopiths and some features with Homo.
Many of these fetures are shared with other Austrolopithecines but it was a surprise to see so many Homo sapiens like features in an Austrolopith 1.977 years old, thus making Homo habilis look more and more like a dead end Austrolopith rather than the ancestor of the human line.
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2012 - 10:56am PT
|
Well duh, of course you can't prove god doesn't exist. Silly booky.
|
|
Psilocyborg
climber
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2012 - 11:39am PT
|
Science & religion: niether can prove there is or isnt a god.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2012 - 11:44am PT
|
you of course meant Richard Dawkins...
...after watching Steven Weinberg I would have to think that Dawkins would agree that scientists find god and religion irrelevant to questions regarding the existence and character of the universe.
After that, the belief in one is exactly the same as the belief in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.
WADR
IMHO
YMMV
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!