tBlog - To herd or not to herd

To herd or not to herd

Blog For Free!

Archives
Home
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images

Sponsored
Blog

Powerful links

The Great "I"

Advanced Thinking

Promethea

The Third Age of the World.

Just do it.

More consistently solid thinking.

Theory and application.

"Rights", The Bad Con

Sign...or not.

Just say "no".

Declaration of Individual Independence

"Anybody wanting a piece of me without my consent can come back tomorrow and go to the end of the line. I gladly accept your requirement to be treated likewise." --jomama

Blog Search Engine

You are here: http://jomama.tblog.com

More ornery blogs John Lopez

Other fine sites Nexialist News

Simmering frogs.

Classic essays etc. Who owns you?

Reasoning for Rational Anarchism

The Granfalloon

Part of a short work of fiction. (See Chaps. 7-12) I won't.

Hit counter

November 19, 2004

17085

add this to your site

Where are visitors to this page?

Another couple of lines from a master thinker.

06.30.04 (6:40 pm) [edit]

"People constantly speak of 'the government'
doing this or that, as they might speak of God
doing it. But the government is really nothing
but a group of men, and usually they are very
inferior men. They may have some better man
working for them, but they themselves are seldom
worthy of any respect." -- H.L. Mencken

Politicized beyond all human recognition.

06.30.04 (10:09 am) [edit]

Haven't we been politicized beyond all human
recognition?

Doesn't anyone else see it?

What would it take for any number of people to
wake up to this, to look at their fishbowl from
outside, to leap outta the fetid water at least
once in a while?
_________________________ __________

Excerpted from the link below:

"The diamond may serve as a useful metaphor for
the design of social systems grounded in the
connected, horizontally-based strength of their
members, rather than in vertical power
structures. The Amish – who have no coercive
political organization and who embrace the
private ownership of property – know what we have
long since forgotten: politics divides us and, in
so doing, weakens our social connectedness.
Political systems set group against group,
engendering a distrust of everyone except, of
course, political leaders. [My emphasis]
By such means, the networks that would otherwise
connect us to one another as we pursue our various
self-interests, become cleaved.

Those who persist in trying to breathe life into
dead horses are the real utopians. The political
structuring of society has long been grounded in
pie-in-the-sky fantasies that power-hungry men
and women can make us better than we are; that
ever-more sophisticated weapons of death and
destruction can bring peace to the world; and
that, in the words of Herbert Spencer, there is a
'political alchemy by which you can get golden
conduct out of leaden instincts.' As our formal
world continues to disintegrate before us, it is
time that we abandon the utopian fictions in
which we are conditioned and face the stark
reality that whatever future we have will be
decided by the content of our thinking. Because
only you and I are in control of – and, thus,
responsible for – our thinking, only you and I
are capable of bringing order to our world."
[My emphasis]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer65.html" title="http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer65.html" target="_blank"http://www.lewrockwell.com/sh...

Do you believe it?

06.29.04 (11:15 am) [edit]

If this is not a con, there's some really
strange shit going on here...
_________________________ _____________

Excerpted from link below:

Ram Implosion Wing

"Wingspan 6'6" cord 3'6" 100-lbs. under went
testing mounted to the back of a V-8 Van GVW
5750-lbs. mileage was calculated based on a
single gallon of gas in back to back test runs,
pilot 195-lbs. Resulted in an increases of
mileage 2-3-times beyond normal expectancies,
however in an independent test run Aug. 13-th
2003 a Dodge Caravan with a V-6 motor weighing in
at GVW 2726 lb.. The driver weighs in at 295 lb.
and the copilot 195 lb..

After topping off the tank we drove out 10.1
miles and back the same 10.1 miles for a total of
20.2 miles round trip, at 65-mph with the ac unit
on. When we arrived back at the fueling station
we were amazed to find that we could only squeeze
0.2 tenths of a gallon back into the tank, we
even picked the hose up and tried to pour the
extra gas from the line into the tank but it all
ran back out onto the ground.

20.2 miles @ 0.2 tenths of a gallon = 101-mpg!

A second trip consisted of a 59 mile round trip
but this time we were only able to squeeze 0.1
tenths of a gallon back into the tank.

59 miles @ 0.1 tenths of a gallon = 590-mpg!

Note: To date no attempts have been made toward
reproducing this particular experiment, thus it
remains a singular event. However my consciences
is that in order to maintain such high mileage's
the RIW will require computer automation to
adjust pitch angle and height of the wing on the
fly."

http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com/" title="http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com/" target="_blank"http://quantumgravitics.tripo...

The Blame Game.

06.28.04 (6:22 pm) [edit]

This is not to take the blame from W.
but aren't they all to blame?

Lotta unanswered questions this article brings
up.

Lotta shit don't add up...and that's the major
reason I posted an excerpt here. You'll probably
want to read it all:
_________________________ _______

"Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment of just
George Bush. Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment
of just Republicans. Fahrenheit 9/11 is an
indictment of the entire US Government that had
to know Bush was lying to the American people to
initiate as[sic]war and stood there smiling
blandly while he did it. Like Hitler, Bush could
not do what he did without a lot of cooperation by
the entire government and the media. Look at the
voting records for the authorization for the use
of force in Iraq and in the draconian assaults on
our freedoms. Both parties voted those "Ayes".
The rush to war and dictatorship was a bipartisan
one, worthy of bipartisan blame. Everyone is
spinning Fahrenheit 9/11 to attack their own
favorite scapegoats, but the truth is there is
more than enough blame for the wars and the
current state of the nation to share all
around." [My emphasis]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/farenheit911michaelmo ore.html" title="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/farenheit911michaelmo ore.html" target="_blank"http://www.whatreallyhappened...

Message to the devout.

06.28.04 (11:02 am) [edit]

What are you devout about?
_______________________

"The continuous disasters of man's history are
mainly due to his excessive capacity and urge to
become identified with a tribe, nation, church or
cause, and to espouse its credo uncritically and
enthusiastically, even if its tenets are contrary
to reason, devoid of self-interest and
detrimental to the claims of self-preservation.

We are thus driven to the unfashionable
conclusion that the trouble with our species is
not an excess of aggression, but an excess
capacity for fanatical devotion."
-- Arthur Koestler

This just in...

06.27.04 (7:46 am) [edit]

The author of this is a sometimes-drunk old US
naval officer living in Mexico:
________________________

"The mind of the believer has freed itself from
the tyranny of 'reality'".

And two handy, near-effortless mechanisms of the
believer-mind:

Validity testing of a factoid:

1] Do i like it? - Does it serve The Movement*?
If yes, then the factoid is 'true'.

2] I don't like it - it doesn't serve The
Movement*, then it's 'false'.
_________________________ _

*The Movement is defined here as The Group Mind-
Fuck, the filling of the Granfalloon with hot air
in a futile attempt to get it up or keep it
aloft, etc.

With that in mind I think I'll go take a good
movement. Nature calls.

What should I name it...a Booshy, Kerroty, a
Nadon?

Hey, don't bother sending me another name. I got
a million of 'em and they're all jokes.

So many names, so little time.

The Blessed Institution

06.26.04 (1:47 pm) [edit]

I've mentioned this before.

For 2000 years everyone thought the earth
was flat.

Could it be we'll discover that, since the
dawn of human history, The Institution (a
non-profit grouping of 2 or more people), is
nothing more than a mutual ass-kissing society
creating its own very special enemies of other
like-mindless Institutions or individuals in
an attempt to justify its existence?

Is that not idiocy chasing itself, having the
effect of a dog going in cirles after its own
tail?

Isn't the nation state the end result of this
long after the first two guys got together and
said, "Let's go kick some ass"?

To what end?

In what way does this resemble the flat earth
society?

How do hamster minds kick the treadmill habit?

Is there a cure for the lemming gene?

Yea, I know. You're saying, "What's with the
hamsters, dogs, lemmings...?"

Well, it is a zoo, ain't it?

Chaos is coming and boy, is she pissed.

06.25.04 (1:52 pm) [edit]

What else would you call it?

You don't believe it?

Isn't it inherent to the Nature of Power that it
invariably and eventually creates the very thing
it is attempting to prevent...chaos?

...Loud guffaws heard coming from off-stage...

Learn why at the link below:
_________________________ _________

"The American system of law is a lie, ultimately
fatal to the system of American governance, much
to the the amusement of observers."

See the reasons.

Some colloidal research results

06.24.04 (4:04 pm) [edit]

Forwarded by a friend of mine...
_____________________

"About three years ago we conducted rather
extensive evaluations for effectivity of
colloidal silver on MRSA (presenting both
topically and as epithelial tissue challenge in
the throat).

We investigated a consequential number of
protocol variations....ALL those including
colloidal silver proved acceptably effective.
However, the most effective single
protocol...utilizing a minimum number of total
ingredients, revealed to be one including nothing
more than 75% 10 to 20 ppm colloidal silver (by
volume), 10% full-strength DMSO (by volume) and
15% Glycerin (by volume). Our results displayed
to be (in comparison to the general anecdotal
information in the posted article) equal ---or
superior in time response----to those claimed by
the authors of the information appearing in web
posting at Mr. Rense's site.

I posted the originating site here.

My comments are not designed...in any way....to
denigrate the very useful/effective results
achieved by the gentleman at the center of this
disclosure.

It is quite pleasing to observe the demonstrated
success of the "untaught medical savage" in
addressing the very real, and threatening,
challenge of MRSA----in contrast to the
ineptitude and poorly designed/executed research
machinations of the U.K's reigning Phamaceutical
Convention. :)"

Sincerely, Brooks Bradley.
---
Harborne Research Foundation

Fred on Escaping Democracy

06.24.04 (8:42 am) [edit]

I don't usually post an entire article here but
this is a classic. Fred just may be the new
Mencken, of course with a Fredly flavor.

Also from Fred's site:

"The Church of Fred. A faith you can believe in.
We are applying for a license permitting use for
religious purposes of psilocybin, slurs,
sterotypes, and .45 ACP."

I'm gonna make a donation to The Church of
Fred and forgive him for the sin he committed
in a previous article.
_________________________ ____

This Ain't Fifth-Century Athens

Curmudgeonly Reflections On Democracy

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

"Autumn looms and presidential elections will
soon roll around, like droppings pushed by dung
beetles. We will be exhorted to vote. Better
advice would be not to vote. The proper response
toward what we occasionally imagine to be
democracy, methinks, is to retain one’s self-
respect by not participating in it.

Voting in particular is an embarrassment, being
a public display of weak character and low
intelligence. Let us face the truth: Democracy,
like spitting in public or the Roman games, is
the proper activity of the lower intellectual and
moral classes. It amounts to collusion in one's
own suckering.

The United States of course is not a democracy
but a wonderfully crafted pretense. We have
separated the results of elections from the
formulation of policy. It is a neat trick: Voting
distracts the rabble without disturbing the
government. You cannot possibly—can you?—believe
that your vote will change anything of
importance? That it will end the flood of semi-
literate Mexican proletarians who join our own?
Divert the schools from their ghettoish
apotheosis of the mentally lame and halt? Cause
governmental behavior to rely on merit instead of
race, creed, color, sex, and national origin?

No. These things are determined remotely by
lobbies, by criminals, and by forces that have no
name. If you are lucky, you may be able to change
parking regulations.

Given that democracy is pointless, and
participation in it a sign of a weak mind, what
is the wisest attitude toward the government?

That of a tick toward a cow. Nothing else makes
sense. The central question of American
government is not what mountebank shall be
president or what eructations of mendacity he may
devise. The question, almost the only question,
is whether the government can get more from you
than you can get from it. One picks pockets, or
one’s pockets are picked.

The clever or well represented—the racial
lobbies, defense industry, teachers unions,
feminists, AIPAC, big pharma, oil,
corporations—suck money from the government. In
turn the government gnaws like a hagfish at the
entrails of middle-class people moldering in
cubicles. These spend their lives in jobs they
hate to buy things they don’t want, such as half-
million-dollar houses in the suburbs, so as to
pay taxes. Elections give them a sense of having
a stake in their flensing: The government is
their hagfish.

Clearly taking part in this is unwise. What then
do you do?

First, and most important, stop regarding
yourself as part of government. Government
doesn’t concern itself with you; why should you
concern yourself with it? The change of attitude
provides both relaxation and perspective.

Next, avoid governmental impositions. There are
many. Military service is the worst of them.
Don’t go. A little man in Washington, whom you
have never met and wouldn’t talk to over a back
fence, tells you to kill people who have done
nothing to you in a foreign country you may never
have heard of. Does this seem reasonable?

Finally, cultivate apathy, which is cheaper than
Prozac and works better. You do not worry about
what you do not care about. I do not propose a
depressed scowl at life, but merely a wholesome
indifference toward those forces malign and
otherwise over which you can have no influence.

Better yet, enjoy the onrushing atrophy. Is the
United States going to hell, western civilization
being subverted, knaves scuttling like fetid
crabs through the corridors of power and nitwits
ravaging the schools in the manner of monkeys in
a fruit store? (Yes, actually.) Relish it for the
splendid historical theater that it is. A better
spectacle there cannot be.

I say this seriously. If you regard yourself as
audience rather than participant, the
accelerating collapse becomes entertainment. You
read each morning’s headlines with zest to see
what new and preposterous clownishness erupts
from Washington. It is high comedy. Just now Mr.
Bush wants to tighten the embargo on Cuba because
of its violations of human rights; meanwhile Mr.
Bush is running a torture camp at Guantanamo. We
have a war on poverty that perpetuates poverty, a
war on drugs that guarantees availability by
keeping prices up.

I doubt that Mark Twain could make such things up.

A huge gap separates those who, on the one hand,
eat their souls up over things they can’t change,
and those who, on the other, focus on their
friends, family, children. You probably have a
sense of what is right, wrong, moral, decent, and
just. To these, I say, you owe allegiance. To
nothing else.

A wholesome apathy does not mean giving up a
love of music or travel or dogs or books or
contemplation of starry skies should the
pollution clear momentarily. Nor does it mean
lack of concern for those around you. It does
mean, or more correctly require, moral self-
determination insofar as it is possible.

The wise recognize that they are insignificant
atoms and set their course accordingly. Yes, in a
small town enjoying sovereignty over its
institutions, participation might make sense. You
might expect to have an influence over matters
material to you. If you wanted the high school to
offer advanced classes in mathematics for your
advanced child, you would stand a reasonable
chance of persuading the school board, and
finding a volunteer teacher if need be.

But today you are merely a minor source of
taxes. It is reasonable therefore to regard
governments not as enemies—they are larger than
you are and will usually win—but as intricate
puzzles. If the government won’t school your
children, do you home-school? Move to France? Can
you qualify for some form of welfare and have the
government support you instead of you, it? Are
laws more to your liking in Thailand?

To what, then, you might ask, does one owe
allegiance? A better question might be: Why
should one owe allegiance to any distant group
beyond one’s influence? Yes, I know: The dog-pack
instinct dominates human behavior. It is why we
have wars and teen-age gangs and attach ourselves
furiously to football teams. Patriotism, meaning
an irrational attachment to whatever country we
were born in, comes naturally. But does it come
reasonably? To use the tired but effective
example, should you be loyal to your country’s
government if it begins operating torture camps
in, say, Bergen-Belsen or Treblinka or, once
more, Guantanamo?

Or should you do what you believe to be right,
decline to be herded like cattle, and live
decently in the interstices of things? These at
least are choices not as humiliating as voting.
Those who wash regularly should not stoop to
democracy."

On Escaping Democracy

Are you wearing Milk Bone underwear?

06.23.04 (1:03 pm) [edit]

Doesn't this article make ya wonder why you're
being ripped off to pay for an army of regulators
who don't or can't regulate? Do you really think
My Favorite Party/Candidate Will Make all the
Bad Things Go Away Soz We Kin all have Heaven
on Earth?

Bwahahahahah.

Y'all be careful now, yaheah. It's a dog eat
dog world out there so wouldn't it be a good
idea to make sure you're not wearin' Milk Bone
underwear?
_________________________ ___

"It is in the interest of market participants to
gain as much information as they can when they
engage in exchange and production. Furthermore,
the various signals sent by markets serve as
regulating mechanisms. For example, the Enron
collapse did not come because regulators blew the
whistle on the company's fraudulent operations,
but rather because potential investors came to
realize the company's shell games could no longer
be hidden. The judgment of investors operating in
the free market was swift and sudden: America's
corporate darling was relegated to the abyss of
penny stocks...

Please understand that fraud is a crime under
common law and was prosecuted as such long before
the U.S. and state governments began to set up
regulatory agencies in the late 1800s.
Furthermore, the business deceptions that
characterized much of Enron's behavior occurred
in heavily regulated securities markets. (Krugman
has been preaching from his New York Times perch
that Enron was operating in an unregulated
environment, something so far from the truth that
only a Times editor or an Ivy League English
professor could believe it.)...

Government regulation did not keep Enron from
defrauding its stockholders and employees. While
its slide into bankruptcy has been spectacular,
it could not have engaged in its financial
shenanigans without the help of the Federal
Reserve's 1990s policy of shoveling new credit
willy-nilly into the economy. In fact, the very
presence of heavy government regulation and
intervention by the Fed into financial markets
tends to create a false sense of assurance that
'if the government is regulating it, everything
must be okay.'...

There is also the quaint notion that government
regulators are picked from a pool of scholarly,
disinterested observers who (1) know how the
regulated industry really works, (2) have no
ties, financial or otherwise, to the industries
being regulated, and (3) have the ability to
provide the kind of leadership the regulated
industries really need...

Krugman and others who claim that the Enron
scandal will be a watershed for regulation miss
the point. Government regulation already
dominates our economic landscape. Tossing on a
few more rules might do damage, but it will not
prevent fraud from occurring in the future. For
that matter, all of this new regulation that
Krugman and others demand will not even prevent
another Enron. In truth, it might ensure that we
have more Enrons down the road..."

http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?printFriendly=Yes&con trol=892&month=41&" title="http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?printFriendly=Yes&con trol=892&month=41&" target="_blank"http://www.mises.org/fullarti...%20title=Regulation%2Band %2BReality&id=41

The man with the magic formula

06.23.04 (10:33 am) [edit]

Who says you gotta have all those titles hanging
behind your name and a multi-million dollar budget
to find a solution to a problem?

Have you ever wondered if all that whoopla brought
with all the above trappings might even be
counter-productive, compared to one man on
a mission?

I don't doubt it.
____________________

"When Brian Bennett, a retired truck driver,
began a series of amateur experiments in the
garage of his Nuneaton home, he never imagined
that the results could save thousands of lives.
Nor did he consider that his dabblings might one
day earn him a multimillion- pound fortune. But,
armed with nothing more than a few reference
books from his local library, Bennett succeeded
in concocting a substance whose properties appear
to be nothing short of miraculous - a wonder-
cream that promises to eradicate the scourge of
hospital 'superbugs',..."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/stor y.jsp?story=533431" title="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/stor y.jsp?story=533431" target="_blank"http://news.independent.co.uk...

Unintended Consequences

06.21.04 (11:37 am) [edit]

"Yet what Cannon and Medawar took as a benign
nose-thumbing at Dreams of Method, other
scientists found incendiary. To say that science
had a significant serendipitous aspect was taken
by some as dangerous denigration. If scientific
discovery were really accidental, then what was
the special basis of expert authority?

What is your answer?

For Merton himself—who one supposes must have
been the senior author—serendipity represented
the keystone in the arch of his social scientific
work. In 1936, as a very young man, Merton wrote
a seminal essay on The Unanticipated Consequences
of Purposive Social Action. It is, he argued,
the nature of social action that what
one intends is rarely what one gets: [See
cellular automata.] Intending to provide resources
for buttressing Christian religion, the natural
philosophers of the Scientific Revolution laid
the groundwork for secularism; people wanting to
be alone with nature in Yosemite Valley wind up
crowding one another. We just don't know
enough—and we can never know enough—to ensure
that the past is an adequate guide to the future:
Uncertainty about outcomes, even of our best-laid
plans, is endemic. All social action, including
that undertaken with the best evidence and
formulated according to the most rational
criteria, is uncertain in its consequences. As
Robert Burns put it, 'The best-laid schemes o'
mice an' men /Gang aft agley, / An' lea'e us
nought but grief an' pain, / For promis'd joy!'"

http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTy peDetail/assetid/34011" title="http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTy peDetail/assetid/34011" target="_blank"http://www.americanscientist....;jsessionid=aaaeJgB5sT-gC 5

Things are lookin' greyer every day.

06.20.04 (6:31 pm) [edit]

"The informal economy is neither small nor benign.

The grey economy is often thought of as
something found at the margins of poor countries,
such as a hawker stand in Thailand or a roadside
vendor in Ghana. But that is misleading. Although
it represents a greater share of total output in
poor countries, it exists in rich and poor places
alike. Recent research suggests that the grey
economy is growing. Moreover, a new study
suggests that it may be slowing the overall
economic growth of developing countries...

Indeed, in cross-country comparisons, the more
expensive and more complicated are taxes and
regulations, the bigger is the informal economy
as a share of GDP."

Whoda thunk it? I'd bet some think
tank did the study based on some bureaucrats
request, spending millions of tax $, francs,
marks...whatever, to find out why their tax
take is falling, something any guy on the street
coulda told 'em.

I'll also bet that after reading the report,
the same idiots will decide that the only way
to combat the problem is to raise taxes and
write more regulations.

And how would these rocket scientists
determine the "informal economy" as a share
of GDP when it will never show up in same?

Bwahahahahah.

http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2766310" title="http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2766310" target="_blank"http://www.economist.com/fina...

Can we come outta the Dark Ages now, please?

06.20.04 (6:13 am) [edit]

Other people are not your property.

You can do anything you want with
your property, even trash it.

But other people are not your property.

So ask and maybe you shall receive.

If you don't get what you want, ask
someone else.

What could be more civilized?

But isn't that what most of us do every
day of our lives....the asking...to get
what we need or want?

What small minority on the planet doesn't
operate by asking? Are they hyuman?

Are they invaders from space or whut?
If they are, are they here to teach us a
lesson?

What might that lesson be?

And if they're from another planet maybe
we can shun 'em til they go home.

In the meantime, why not laugh at 'em
cuz they don't know us.

Think about it.

Looking for knowledge in all the wrong places.

06.19.04 (5:18 am) [edit]

This is my attempt here on this blog, to go where
few (or no man) have gone before, to bring the
unspoken to this page.

Remember...for 2,000 years everyone thought
the earth was flat. Now that's funny, hilariously
funny, if it weren't so fucking sad that so many
were believed for so long.

How many other things do you think we're wrong
about...today, in this era?
______________________

"If you want to hear the knowledge you do not
have time to learn on your own, listen to the
people who all the knowledge-searchers are not
listening to. If you want to find the knowledge
on your own, look where all the searchers are not
looking. The knowledge is yours for the asking.
Ask yourself the questions. The questions will
find the knowledge already in your mind, derived
from the data points saturating the human
phenomenon, by design."

http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-13.html" title="http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-13.html" target="_blank"http://www.think.ws/relatedco...

Goofy dude description.

06.18.04 (5:57 pm) [edit]

All this seems so hard to see for most people.

Why is that?

I wouldn't dream of whacking someone to get
them to agree with me. Why would anyone else?

Won't that just piss off a whole lotta other folks?

And where does that get me?

Where does that get you?
_________________________ ____

"Those goofy chaps perpetually slinging rocks and
bullets and bombs and hollow political words of
peace around the Middle East and everywhere else
could not recognize the readily available process
to promptly achieve their fondest desires even if
Leonardo da Vinci walked up to them and handed
them the complete diagrams otherwise
understandable to grade school children. Those
institutional leaders will die of old age as
clueless as they are today, simply because they
use the time of their mind to make statements
rather than ask questions."

http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-13.html" title="http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-13.html" target="_blank"http://www.think.ws/relatedco...

Where do them damn things come from?

06.18.04 (10:07 am) [edit]

epatterson said in the comment section of A test
below:

"It's great to have an answer. It's great to have
a question to that answer. But it's greater to
have the thought to the question that led to that
answer."

He's right in his conclusion.

So another question came to mind.

Where do the thoughts to the questions come from?
They seem to materialize from nowhere don't they.

Could they come from the quantum realm?

I'm gonna state my hypothesis again.

[hypothesis]

When the observer is looking into The Quantum Box
he's looking into his own mind. When he looks away
the particles disappear.

Who's the creator of these particles if not the
observer?

Could these particles be the questions floating around
waiting to be asked and brought out of the quantum
ether?

[/hypothesis]

Nah. That's too easy and how the hell would anyone
prove it?

But don't look to the scientists or philosophers to
do it.

If it's proven, it'll be done by some self-funded
tinkerer in his garage.

The absolute truth.

06.17.04 (1:50 pm) [edit]

"There are no absolutes."

What's wrong with that statement?

Pool tables.

06.17.04 (11:04 am) [edit]

If you don't believe in Newtonian physics someone
will clean your clock on the billiard table.

Anybody know how to play quantum pool?

The horse rider

06.16.04 (2:21 pm) [edit]

What can I say?

What do you say to this?

* * * * *

The horse rider... 3 December 2001

Notice the consistent reaction of government,
military and other force-based institution
leaders when you attempt to inform them that the
process of reasoning prevails over the process of
force for the design of the human mind. Common
among the reactions is their rhetorically
nebulous accusations that your suggestion is just
a bunch of useless philosophy. Some of the
specific examples are priceless displays of the
zenith of human ignorance.

They will live out their lives remaining
clueless of the value of the human mind, and
genuinely believe that the zenith of the human
phenomenon is the gun and the bomb. They will
teach their children the same. That includes the
same sorts who extol the virtues of democracy and
law, backed by guns and bombs, still clueless of
the utility of reasoning to defeat every enemy.

For an analogy, consider a theoretical person
who has ridden a horse his entire life, for
transportation, and has never seen an automobile.
Offer him an automobile with an unlimited supply
of gasoline, the description of what it will do,
and the answer to his every related question. The
aforementioned institution leaders will
consistently state that the thing is not a horse
and therefore useless for anything beyond
philosophical prattlings. They will not even ask
questions. Their curiosity stops at what they
already know, which they learned until a
particular event blocked their further access to
the curiosity process in the human mind.

And if you don't take your automobile out of
their sight, they will shoot it with their six-
gun to display their power over it.

Enjoy the humor they provide observers, by
design.

* * * * *

More...

Clarity from a master.

06.15.04 (9:37 am) [edit]

Eric does it again, an itinerant farm
worker, educating himself in the local
libraries as he went.

Later he became a longshoreman.

He was a German immigrant to the US.

He had no formal education but maybe
that's why he saw things so clearly.

Do you see what he means?

This is why I'm convinced personal tests are the
ultimate tests as I do with Colloidal Silver.

I wonder why he left out The Academic
in the last paragraph.

Or are they part of one or more of the
three groups mentioned?
______________

"One might equate growing up with a mistrust of
words. A mature person trusts his eyes more than
his ears. Irrationality often manifests itself in
upholding the word against the evidence of the
eyes.

Children, savages, and true believers remember
far less what they have seen than what they have
heard." -- Eric Hoffer

A test

06.09.04 (2:33 pm) [edit]

What is the greatest accomplishment of any human?

Let me qualify that.

This is not a question that asks you to identify
a specific human but all or any human at
any time.

This is an exercise. Don't worry about wrong
answers. It's about learning and all of us get it
wrong, most of the time. I'm no exception.
I'm just trying to improve.

Post your answers in the comments, if you would.

The Reason.

06.09.04 (12:07 pm) [edit]

Go ahead and make a comment with,
"Yea, but..." in it and it will be deleted along
with any other contradiction resembling same.
_________________________ ___________

"The government bureaucrat constitutes the reason
you are still living in the primitive dark ages
compared to how you could otherwise be living. He
attempts to stop all human activity which does
not serve his useless bureaucracy which offers
nothing needed and no compensation for the time
and effort everyone in its grasp must spend to
serve it under penalty of prison. The government
bureaucrat is a sinkhole for human endeavor. He
is an anchor or leech on human capability. He is
a human like all humans, making personal mistakes
and institutional mistakes. He points to the
mistakes of everyone else, and fools fools into
thinking that he exists to solve everyone else's
mistakes. He solves nothing because there is no
incentive to do so even if he could think enough
to solve even his own mistakes. In fact, he
concertedly fabricates problems because his
institution's existence is predicated on the
rhetorical illusion that he solves everyone
else's problems, so he must increase those
problems. He need not serve or please his
customers. His government's armed police imprison
and seize the assets of anyone who does not pay
his salary and expenses via taxes. No one is
allowed to compete with him, under penalty of
prison. The bureaucrat places process, not just
above achievement of any defined goal, but
totally replacing achievement, since achievement
of any defined goal eliminates the need for his
bureaucracy. Goal-achievement is mutually
exclusive to bureaucracy. He does not think,
since thinking is defined by the process of
identifying and resolving contradictions. The
bureaucrat creates and perpetuates
contradictions, the opposite of the human mind's
thinking process. His job is fulfilled by being
paid good money to cause problems or do nothing,
so he does."

http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-6.html" title="http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-6.html" target="_blank"http://www.think.ws/relatedco...

Reasoning - The Gold

06.08.04 (10:17 am) [edit]

See the link "Advanced thinking" in the left panel
here for the entire course.

And don't come back here after reading that
site telling me, "You said it'd be easy!"

Would you think me wrong if I told you that fewer
than one in a thousand will read it and fewer by
far will understand it?

Given that, why do you suppose we're mucking about
in This Quagmire?
_________________________ __

"Imagine the anguish, or perhaps raw hatred and
retaliation, of the police, judges, politicians,
chairmen of the boards, network news anchors and
every other poor sad chap who stumbled into any
of countless institutionally titled positions, if
they had to compete for respect with their
reasoning rather than the cheap crutch of
traditional, unquestioned convention kowtowing to
rhetorical illusions of titled superiority over
fellow humans. What would happen to a society if
its people competed for respect on the basis of
their reasoning? How soon do you want to learn
how to live 500 years and visit the neighbor
galaxy? Reasoning alone, and nothing else,
advances knowledge among humans. Institutional
process advances only more useless hours of
standing ovations for the person the hand-
clappers functionally worship, and the person who
therefore is convinced that he has achieved the
greatest knowledge. [My emphasis] How many
more human hours of standing ovations, placard
waving, title bestowing and such institutional
technology will find the cure for cancer? For
what do you and your organization leaders use
your time?"

http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-4.html" title="http://www.think.ws/relatedconcepts-4.html" target="_blank"http://www.think.ws/relatedco...