Is Utopianism Actually a Bad Thing?

ya know, when the internet and stuff lik EXCITE first showed up, I was still in the teaching game and only worked summers and first semester in the field. Wed share resourcs and evidence and dat for our students to use as guides.
Now that the internett has matured and when social media became a means of "sharing bullshit", Im amazed at how some of our posters have taken the dummy road.

bulma, why not seek the anointed one, you two can share cartoon clips and creationist dogma doggerel and not be embarrassed how really dumass you sound.

Frank said:


He speaks the truth here. His astonishment is so profound that he will henceforth ignore you.

That isn't the only thing profound.

I've already explained why God exists multiple times. He declared my argument incoherent as a ready reason to ignore it.

That's pretty profound denial right there.

First, what the hell is Excite?

If you don't understand that we as humans know very little other than bullshit, then you are truly lost. We believe things, and tell ourselves we "know" them. There are very few facts.

And what kind of dumass doesn't seem to know the word has a 'b' in it? I know I spell words wrong when I'm sleepy or using the Kindle but half the time, you don't even seem to consider doing a good job writing.

Also, Anointed and I don't get along, even less than the two of you and me. This has a large part to do with his literal false interpretation of religion, and the fact that his posts are even more long-winded than mine. In other words, I can't stand him because he's too much like I am.

I also suspect the two of you are CIA disinformation trolls, which explains why you guys are so obfuscating and resistant to new information. If it came to be public knowledge that Jesus has risen, the powers that be would see it as a threat, as they did in Roman times. A populace cannot be controlled if it is unafraid of death, after all.

The same people who want to build a "utopia" (scoff, more like dystopia) on this Earth, not realizing this world is by nature imperfect, also their level best to discredit the idea of life after death. Why yearn for the perfect state, why fear the oppressive state, when you can simply live a good life in the knowledge that death is not the end?

And this is from the one who believes that Jesus was born a female and had its enlarged clitoris circumcised when it was 8 days old. Haa Haaa Haaaaa.

You did NOT explain why God exists.

You explained why you blindly guess a god exists.

No problem. You may grow up.

your assertions seem to be belived through tales and "Parables" rather than hard evidenc yet you fail to even recogniz that youve nothing in your quiver.
As far as my misspellings, I celebrate it and sometimes add unique word structure to it . I like it when the weaker minded ones (those who claiming to be " compassionte Xtians" yet love to ridicule the sick and the crippled ), will use my habit as their only basis of argument.

Excite was one of th first internet encyclopedias that got run over by Google and Wikipedia

Youre other "observations" are rather like Anointed, I always wondered of the two of you, who was the sock monkey cause your views of things that interest me are riddled with dead on similar error and devoid of any attempts at learning, SOOO I assume the things that dont interest me, like your(and his) interpretations of your religionism are similarly messed up, (but dont stop cuz both of you come off like theseCrystal Cathedral "Hucksters")

Okay, make a blind guess.

Any guess at all. Tell me, how many fingers am I holding up?

Now, a blind guess will always fail because you put your faith in luck.

An educated guess is all we humans have. We don't know of anything for sure, but we make educated guess based on what is repeatedly true.

Anyone who has done any art, any writing, or made anything, has a repeated result that keeps staring them in the face. "This didn't make itself, I made this." Followed by a sense of pride, and possibly a sense of purpose. Now other people might not pay me much for my painting Bone Trees or for my books. But this is an inescapable fact. "This didn't make itself." Atheism is a bit like a welfare mom taking handouts for granted and saying "Free money! I don't have to work! " Sorry, but that money came from taxpayers. Likewise, a God out there pushed the On Button (at the very least!) and the universe sprung into existence.

Everything I see that exists was repeatedly created. So I make an EDUCATED guess, that this is not suddenly inconsistent when it comes to the very biggest thing, the universe. Nor for the tiniest things, bacteria and atoms (and subatomic particles).

You're the one making blind guesses. Btw, the number of fingers?

(It was three. And a thumb)

I make blind guesses all the time, Bulma.

I suspect most of us do.

I call my blind guesses...GUESSES.



On that, as with the question of whether any gods exist, I do not have enough unambiguous evidence upon which to make a meaningful guess...so I choose not to guess.

I would, however, hazard that the number is between zero and ten.



Brilliant! Did you feel a rush after writing that absurd sentence. Did the other kids in the sandbox applaud?



Horse ****. We also have "I choose not to make a guess."

But that is only available to people with a functioning brain...so you shouldn't bother with it.



No you do not. But assholes like you have no trouble at all saying that your god-creator...DID NOT COME FROM ANYTHING...WAS NOT MADE...BUT INSTEAD ALWAYS EXISTED.

You actually posit something that did not come from anything while claiming that nothing can just be without having been created.

Can you truly not see the absurdity of that?



Yeah, you are proud of that childish absurdity.

Oh, well. Whatever makes you happy...and whatever keeps you coming back for more...

...is just great with me.

Tales and parables are what we humans have to work with.

You may think there are facts, but facts are simply dead people writing something and putting a footnote [1] here.

[1] Some random source

I go to that source, and they attribute some other source. And another source, and another. How did he get his info, the original source?
Well, he didn't quote any important people, as he's the first one. He either made some observations and tests, or he faked the whole thing. Now there are a great many things that are actually elaborate fraud, because people bandwagoned on to ideas they liked rather than making their own tests.

Fawning over facts in a book is not learning anything.

What we humans can trust is our stories (even if we learned the wrong lesson from them, they are sizably more valuable than words in a book that may be selling a convincing fraud). Our stories tell us our personal histories. They are testimonies to a life well- (or poorly-) lived. They often contain inklings of a larger truth. We humans like stories, good or bad, which is why people can't get enough of the latest drama.

I shall tell you a parable of the bad shepherd. (The good shepherd cares for his sheep, but this story is not about him. You can read the Bible if you want for that) Now the bad shepherd only wants to turn his sheep into meat for his own profit. He tells them that there is no purpose to their life, so they will not think too much about the purpose he plans, that of selling them for meat. He tells them that they are just sheep, so they will not become confident enough to venture on their own, seeking something more. He brands each of them with his sign, and puts a chip on them. When one of them has run off, like the good shepherd, he pursues them. To the ends of the earth. When they are at market weight, they are finished. They will all be led to the slaughter. The good shepherd and the bad shepherd are neighbours. Their property looks the same on an overhead map, as part of a larger plan. Because the bad shepherd supplies meat and nothing but, the good shepherd doesn't have to worry about butchery, and their lambs die peacefully having given their wool.
But should the bad shepherd ever become greedy, there are two things that can happen. He can start killing his lambs younger and younger, and he will run short of lambs after awhile, after new ones don't replace those he's killed. Anf some of his sheep run away. His market amount will lower from fifty fully grown sheep to less children, so less adults when those mature. He will lose money, and have to sell his farm because he was too overzealous. Or he can try to take the sheep from the good shepherd. The good shepherd will call the police, and have him arrested.

Did you understand this parable?

The bad shepherd is Antichrists, each of which work against God and toward destruction. The brand and the chip are the Mark of the Beast, and like with the story of the good shepherd, those wanted by the bad shepherd are willing to pursue one and leave the rest behind. The good shepherd is Jesus (and Jesus as he lives through his followers). The property looks the same because it is the Tao. Harmony exists when good and evil do not bother each other. There will always be those who do harm to others as long as this world lasts. But there are two ways evil can run afoul. It can be heavy-handed as in a despotic government, and then we either have revolts (sheep running away) or it can massacre people to the point of not having enough to perform essential jobs. Failed state collapses, and there is starvation and poverty. Or it can try to steal the righteous. This is part of the end time prophecy where the Beast tries to trick the elect, and ultimately all parties concerned are punished. But it also refers to the sin of trying to deconvert theists. Know that each of us will be judged by how much light and hope we bring into the world, and when we try to drive others away from what they hope for, we have done something wrong.

In short, you have no interest in facts but prefer parables and Frank's guesses. The folks in the trenches discovering our planet's history are to you pointless.

so do you understand how radioactive mineral decay is used to establish age?

Do you know about gene transfer and where it occurs. Do you know the work of two names in this field are?
Do you know about Dr Renne and the Hell Creek?

Why do we have major medical college deans select paleontologists for that post?

What are the rules of evidence under at least two systems used in courts and in science?

Learning tarts somewhere. what do you call what you are spouting? Think of my Jewish ancestors, They had another word for it.

In order for something to create, you have to be in some way Beyond what you are creating. That is, if I create a program on the computer, I am not a line of code inside that computer, I am a being outside that computer.

That is, the only acceptable solution to the rule that everything must be created is either something outside and exempt (not "a line of code"), or the rule is universal and this Creator also created himself.
That everything is created... except the universe, which seems to have clearly defined rules binding it but you say arose by chance, is not an acceptable solution. If it arose by chance, our universe should look more like the non-Euclidean mess you see in some of Lovecraft's work. So why do we have neat laws like density, momentum, friction, magnetism, if our universe should be random? This doesn't add up. If the very framework of the universe was creared randomly, then everything that results would be in random configuration unless there were strict laws guiding it into certain limits. I could randomly build a house, but laws of architecture mean that certain structures stand, and certain others fall. Likewise, tou have to explain where these laws came from.

I understand about carbon dating. I also understand that it ceases to be accurate after the age of complete carbon decay. Just as conventional thermometers cease to be as good after the freezing point of mercury. Measurements are only as good as the materials used to test.

Because of this, at some point you're going to admit you're guessing. The difference in this and a blind guess is thar the blind guesser just gives up and says "Well I guess we can't prove it." An educated guesser understands they don't "know" yet they use what they've learned.

Have you never heard of historical revisionism?

I study history. I've also heard two stories about the Crusades and about the Dark Ages. We have to determine for ourselves what is true when contradictory facts exist.

What does the Crusades and the Dark Ages have to do with the sciences such as paleontology?

Valid point.

One of the problems of modern society is that so few people ever experience the effort needed to make anything. They haven’t confronted entropy face to face. They have had it all handed to them.
They don’t recognize exquisite design when it’s right in their face because they've been told it’s 'nature', nothing to see here, leave it to the ‘ authorities' to tell you .

If you really comprehend what you are looking at in the field of biology, especially molecular biology of the cell, you will be shocked to the core when you do. I would be less surprised to find wires, circuit boards and motors under my skin than what is actually there. It’s awe inspiring.

But they’ve been 'Blinded with Science' to quote the song.

Unlike most of the 'religious', I do not claim to know where God came from or 'when' he came into being, but I sure as hell can recognize 'Design' when I see it. In the realm of science, the question of where/when God himself came from is absurd on it’s face. Physicists tell us that there was no time or space before about 13.8 billion years ago. And yet they mock 'god' for not being scientific. Their hypocrisy is mountainous.

All a self congratulatory way to avoid opening a door to science.

I can’t even quote 'science' without being accused of being anti science.

The mountain grows ever higher.