I just recieved an IM from out of nowhere to which I became suspicious of the motives behind the impromptu chat. Rather than try to explain this chat I will just post it with fair warning to all. Don't call me for strange crap. Get to the point or get away from me.
Ugafan495: heyman
Erks33: hello
Erks33: Whats up
Ugafan495: not much. just kickin' back on my day off. you?
Erks33: blogin away
Erks33: You must be a university of georgia fan
Ugafan495: yeah...i graduated in '95 from uga.
Erks33: thats cool
Ugafan495: played baseball at georgia for 2 years
.Erks33: ah
Erks33: were you good
Ugafan495: yeah, until i hurt my knee playing football with some friends of mine....couldn't play my senior year.
Erks33: bet that wasnt fun
Erks33: what brings you to me?
Ugafan495: just searching profiles, saw you are in warner robins...i grew up in macon. now live in atlanta.
Erks33: oh so you can see I am kindof a reactor so to speak
Erks33: well thats interesting
Ugafan495: how old are you?
Erks33: 46
Erks33: and you
Ugafan495: 32
Ugafan495: play any sports?
Erks33: I used to
Ugafan495: what did you play?
Erks33: I got hurt pretty bad in highschool football
Erks33: had a stroke and got whiplash
Ugafan495: damn.
Erks33: i figured i should get out while i was still alive
Erks33: I was good though
Ugafan495: how big a guy are you? ht/wt?
Erks33: 6 ft 220 lbsUgafan495: dark/light hair?
Erks33: grey
Ugafan495: hairy/smooth?
Erks33: why?
Ugafan495: just wondered
Erks33: i am neanderthol in appearance
Ugafan495: huh?
Erks33: jutting jaw slanty forehead
Erks33: pointy chin and nose
Erks33: bad teeth and a laugh that scares the hell out of people
Ugafan495: ah
Erks33: with broad shoulders and a deep chest which hides a super strenght that belies description
Well that concludes that pass for the day.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Saturday, June 25, 2005
Wisdom VS the previous
Main Entry: wis·dom Pronunciation: 'wiz-d m Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Old English wisdom, from wis, wise Date: before 12th century1 a : accumulated philosophic or scientific learning : KNOWLEDGE b : ability to discern inner qualities and relationships : INSIGHT c : good sense : JUDGMENT d : generally accepted belief 2 : a wise attitude or course of action 3 : the teachings of the ancient wise men synonym see SENSEPronunciation Key
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
Wisdom is not intellect. The power to know does not immediatly translate into the ability to devinate that is to deduce a new thing from given information. Nor the ability to utilize such in a proper manner which given the nature of the word would include the benifit of oneself and other people.
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
Wisdom is not intellect. The power to know does not immediatly translate into the ability to devinate that is to deduce a new thing from given information. Nor the ability to utilize such in a proper manner which given the nature of the word would include the benifit of oneself and other people.
Memory vs. Intellect
Main Entry: mem·o·ry Pronunciation: 'mem-rE, 'me-m-Function: nounInflected Form(s): plural -ries Etymology: Middle English memorie, from Middle French memoire, from Latin memoria, from memor mindful; akin to Old English gemimor well-known, Greek mermEra care, Sanskrit smarati he remembersDate: 14th century1
a : the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms
b : the store of things learned and retained from an organism's activity or experience as evidenced by modification of structure or behavior or by recall and recognition
2 a : commemorative remembranceb : the fact or condition of being remembered
3 a : a particular act of recall or recollection b : an image or impression of one that is remembered
c : the time within which past events can be or are remembered
4 a : a device or a component of a device in which information especially for a computer can be inserted and stored and from which it may be extracted when wanted b : capacity for storing information
5 : a capacity for showing effects as the result of past treatment or for returning to a former condition; used especially of a material (as metal or plastic) synonyms MEMORY, REMEMBRANCE, RECOLLECTION, REMINISCENCE mean the capacity for or the act of remembering, or the thing remembered. MEMORY applies both to the power of remembering and to what is remembered. REMEMBRANCE applies to the act of remembering or the fact of being remembered . RECOLLECTION adds an implication of consciously bringing back to mind often with some effort . REMINISCENCE suggests the recalling of usually pleasant incidents, experiences, or feelings from a remote past .
Pronunciation Key
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
Main Entry: in·tel·lect Pronunciation: 'in-t l-"ektFunction: nounEtymology: Middle English, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin intellectus, from intellegere to understand  more at INTELLIGENT Date: 14th century1 a : the power of knowing as distinguished from the power to feel and to will : the capacity for knowledge b : the capacity for rational or intelligent thought especially when highly developed 2 : a person with great intellectual powers Pronunciation Key
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
One thing people are doing I have noticed is confusing memory with intellect. A person with a good memory may appear intelligent but when their cognitive abilities are tested the actual intellect comes clear. If a person with a good memory attemts to decieve others into thinking they are smart or if same individual is themselves confused by thier own belief that because they can remember minutiae that they must be smart when in fact a good memory does not equal intelligence (After all animals exhibit good memory and we all know that they are only as smart as animals). Not very smart. Though there are mamals which exhibit intellect(dolphins) they are mainly hampered by an inability to use tools or in the case of dolphins limited even though they probably have the intellect to do so. To the layman-They got no hands. Yet I digress.
A person with intellect also may have a poor memory and by outward appearences look moronic but when tested for the cognative using say an IQ test turn up a surprising 133 with a bent for seeing things from the macro versus the memory induced micro.
a : the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms
b : the store of things learned and retained from an organism's activity or experience as evidenced by modification of structure or behavior or by recall and recognition
2 a : commemorative remembrance
3 a : a particular act of recall or recollection b : an image or impression of one that is remembered
c : the time within which past events can be or are remembered
4 a : a device or a component of a device in which information especially for a computer can be inserted and stored and from which it may be extracted when wanted b : capacity for storing information
5 : a capacity for showing effects as the result of past treatment or for returning to a former condition; used especially of a material (as metal or plastic) synonyms MEMORY, REMEMBRANCE, RECOLLECTION, REMINISCENCE mean the capacity for or the act of remembering, or the thing remembered. MEMORY applies both to the power of remembering and to what is remembered
Pronunciation Key
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
Main Entry: in·tel·lect Pronunciation: 'in-t l-"ektFunction: nounEtymology: Middle English, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin intellectus, from intellegere to understand  more at INTELLIGENT Date: 14th century1 a : the power of knowing as distinguished from the power to feel and to will : the capacity for knowledge b : the capacity for rational or intelligent thought especially when highly developed 2 : a person with great intellectual powers Pronunciation Key
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, IncorporatedMerriam-Webster Privacy Policy
One thing people are doing I have noticed is confusing memory with intellect. A person with a good memory may appear intelligent but when their cognitive abilities are tested the actual intellect comes clear. If a person with a good memory attemts to decieve others into thinking they are smart or if same individual is themselves confused by thier own belief that because they can remember minutiae that they must be smart when in fact a good memory does not equal intelligence (After all animals exhibit good memory and we all know that they are only as smart as animals). Not very smart. Though there are mamals which exhibit intellect(dolphins) they are mainly hampered by an inability to use tools or in the case of dolphins limited even though they probably have the intellect to do so. To the layman-They got no hands. Yet I digress.
A person with intellect also may have a poor memory and by outward appearences look moronic but when tested for the cognative using say an IQ test turn up a surprising 133 with a bent for seeing things from the macro versus the memory induced micro.
Prosperity is built on the truth
In order to flourish and prosper we must be able to see and do the truth by ourselves. If we cannot see and do the truth then we will make errors and in those errors we will not prosper. If we say we see the truth but do a lie we cannot prosper. For either we lied about seeing the truth and did a lie or in our deceptive behavior did a truth and lied about it engaging an old mathematical principle. A lie being a zero and the truth being a positive when multiplied together always equal a zero, and there is no way to escape this method. There is no way to add a lie to an equasion and make the equasion a positive; the whole thought becomes in that instant a zero.
In other words If you are telling the truth about something but want people to think something else and add a lie then what you are telling people in that instant becomes nothing. and if people follow that nothing they will always end up in the same place. Nowhere! And if there goal is prosperity measured in dollars and cents then they will end up broke.
In other words If you are telling the truth about something but want people to think something else and add a lie then what you are telling people in that instant becomes nothing. and if people follow that nothing they will always end up in the same place. Nowhere! And if there goal is prosperity measured in dollars and cents then they will end up broke.
Friday, June 24, 2005
Conundrums
If I win you win. If I lose you lose. Therefore in order for you to win you must defeat me however in your victory you lose.
What is it you lose? The world! Therefore I win. Why? Because I was right.
Therefore I urge you on to defeat me so that I can win.
What is it you lose? The world! Therefore I win. Why? Because I was right.
Therefore I urge you on to defeat me so that I can win.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
The Supreme Court is loosing its mind
The closely watched case involving New London, Conn., homeowners was one of six decisions issued Thursday as the court neared the end of its term. The justices are scheduled to release their final six rulings, including one on the constitutionality of Ten Commandments displays on public property, on Monday.
If the Supreme Court rules against the Ten Comandments then they will have to jackhammer the image of Moses holding the Ten Commandments off of the buildings potico. I hope they don't but in any case if Christians don't rise up in protest the gradient on this slide will just get worse.
From Aol.com
If the Supreme Court rules against the Ten Comandments then they will have to jackhammer the image of Moses holding the Ten Commandments off of the buildings potico. I hope they don't but in any case if Christians don't rise up in protest the gradient on this slide will just get worse.
From Aol.com
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Science
I think something is true but is it? Is knowledge thinking or is it knowing? Is there a difference between thinking and knowing? If there isn't a difference then why have two different words. If you say you think, are you saying you know or are you saying maybe? Are you telling me a little white lie just to make me feel better to include me in your thought or are you saying unequivocally it's a fact?
Do you people know the damage you are doing by saying you think when in fact you are saying you know. Do you know the damage that you do when you say you know when in fact you only think. Do you think that being apart of a group of people that say they know when they know they don't know, knowing that their associates also say they know knowing they don't know makes them apart of something that they know. I know this makes you who say you do know when you know that you don't know a group of people who don't know and hoping to deceive those who do know into believing that you do know.
So I should rename this one Thinking versus Knowing. Nope.
I think I know Why science. It is to think so we can know, not to think therefore we know. We know because we thought, but not all we thought led to what we know or what we think we know.
We don't know because we felt we know. We know because in every possible and unlimited way that we could think of what we know to be true always ends up the same. Then we know.
If we say we know but if every possible way that we think to test the truth is tried and one of the ways we think is not the same then we do not know.
If we say we know but we know that every test did not lead to the same then we are lieing.
If we tell others this lie and they being beguiled into thinking that what we say we know is known and so order their lives and fall into the unknown, then we have committed one of the most egregious crimes that man can perpetrate on another which can only be mollified by sequestering the liars from our selves so that we not be beguiled by such as they any more and hope that we are able to recover from the unknown to live in the known again.
Is it possible to know everything? Shall we put aside living our lives until we know that we know everything, or shall we live with what we know until we know more?
My answer for you can only be that I do not know. I can tell you what I think from what I know for you. I know that living in the truth cannot be for we live not by the truth but by the life that we have been given. Whether I know the truth and live by it or not is an aside for I live either way, that is the truth. That to live to make another's life better is the life that I live. To make another's life better makes my life better. If I am enriched for making another's life better is not important to me for you owe me nothing for me making your life better. To do otherwise would be to enslave you to me making me responsible for you and I will take no responsibility for you, your life, or you actions. Though I have the mind to empower me as such it is not my will to do so. I must be true to myself first. It is the bastion of all that I believe in as my behavior as a man. That if I free you from debt to me I will be the one who is free whether you are free or not. Neither do I indent you to me.
As for me I will live from what I know and that is this: There is too much that I do not know that transcends what I know and what other's know for me to know everything and therefore I know that if there is not something greater than mankind that knows then there is no reason to know anything and that I would be better off as an animal not knowing .
That it is better not knowing than to say that I know when I know that I do not know and to have been beguiled by those that say they know when they know that they don't know irritates me because I didn't know that they were saying that they knew but they didn't know, and I could have known.
It is bad for someone who says that they know when they know that they don't know to say to someone who knows that they know they don't know. Because the person who knows knows that he can no longer associate himself with the person who says he does know but doesn't because the knowledge that there is one more person who doesn't know decreases his chances of knowing more.
Sadly there are others that work for and wish for others to not know even hoping that others don't know so that they may enslave them with what they know.
It is a true gem to find out something new and to know. It is a greater gem to share what you know and have others discover the same.
Do you people know the damage you are doing by saying you think when in fact you are saying you know. Do you know the damage that you do when you say you know when in fact you only think. Do you think that being apart of a group of people that say they know when they know they don't know, knowing that their associates also say they know knowing they don't know makes them apart of something that they know. I know this makes you who say you do know when you know that you don't know a group of people who don't know and hoping to deceive those who do know into believing that you do know.
So I should rename this one Thinking versus Knowing. Nope.
I think I know Why science. It is to think so we can know, not to think therefore we know. We know because we thought, but not all we thought led to what we know or what we think we know.
We don't know because we felt we know. We know because in every possible and unlimited way that we could think of what we know to be true always ends up the same. Then we know.
If we say we know but if every possible way that we think to test the truth is tried and one of the ways we think is not the same then we do not know.
If we say we know but we know that every test did not lead to the same then we are lieing.
If we tell others this lie and they being beguiled into thinking that what we say we know is known and so order their lives and fall into the unknown, then we have committed one of the most egregious crimes that man can perpetrate on another which can only be mollified by sequestering the liars from our selves so that we not be beguiled by such as they any more and hope that we are able to recover from the unknown to live in the known again.
Is it possible to know everything? Shall we put aside living our lives until we know that we know everything, or shall we live with what we know until we know more?
My answer for you can only be that I do not know. I can tell you what I think from what I know for you. I know that living in the truth cannot be for we live not by the truth but by the life that we have been given. Whether I know the truth and live by it or not is an aside for I live either way, that is the truth. That to live to make another's life better is the life that I live. To make another's life better makes my life better. If I am enriched for making another's life better is not important to me for you owe me nothing for me making your life better. To do otherwise would be to enslave you to me making me responsible for you and I will take no responsibility for you, your life, or you actions. Though I have the mind to empower me as such it is not my will to do so. I must be true to myself first. It is the bastion of all that I believe in as my behavior as a man. That if I free you from debt to me I will be the one who is free whether you are free or not. Neither do I indent you to me.
As for me I will live from what I know and that is this: There is too much that I do not know that transcends what I know and what other's know for me to know everything and therefore I know that if there is not something greater than mankind that knows then there is no reason to know anything and that I would be better off as an animal not knowing .
That it is better not knowing than to say that I know when I know that I do not know and to have been beguiled by those that say they know when they know that they don't know irritates me because I didn't know that they were saying that they knew but they didn't know, and I could have known.
It is bad for someone who says that they know when they know that they don't know to say to someone who knows that they know they don't know. Because the person who knows knows that he can no longer associate himself with the person who says he does know but doesn't because the knowledge that there is one more person who doesn't know decreases his chances of knowing more.
Sadly there are others that work for and wish for others to not know even hoping that others don't know so that they may enslave them with what they know.
It is a true gem to find out something new and to know. It is a greater gem to share what you know and have others discover the same.
Monday, June 20, 2005
Does lieing cheating and stealing pay?
I don't know why don't you ask these two.
Updated: 10:22 PM EDT
Adelphia Founder Sentenced to 15 Years
John Rigas's Son Timothy Gets 20-Year Jail Term
By ERIN McCLAM, AP
Getty ImagesJohn Rigas, 80, and his son Timothy were convicted of fraud and conspiracy charges. Jump Below:· Photo Gallery: Faces of Scandal
NEW YORK (June 20) - John Rigas, who turned a $300 investment a half-century ago into cable behemoth Adelphia Communications Corp., was sentenced to 15 years in prison Monday for his role in the looting and debt-hiding scandal that pummeled the company into bankruptcy.
Rigas' son Timothy, 49, who like his father was convicted last year of bank fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy, was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Sand could have sentenced both men to life.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
C'mon feds get some more I find this extremely entertaining.
Courtesy of Aol News
Updated: 10:22 PM EDT
Adelphia Founder Sentenced to 15 Years
John Rigas's Son Timothy Gets 20-Year Jail Term
By ERIN McCLAM, AP
Getty ImagesJohn Rigas, 80, and his son Timothy were convicted of fraud and conspiracy charges. Jump Below:· Photo Gallery: Faces of Scandal
NEW YORK (June 20) - John Rigas, who turned a $300 investment a half-century ago into cable behemoth Adelphia Communications Corp., was sentenced to 15 years in prison Monday for his role in the looting and debt-hiding scandal that pummeled the company into bankruptcy.
Rigas' son Timothy, 49, who like his father was convicted last year of bank fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy, was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Sand could have sentenced both men to life.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
C'mon feds get some more I find this extremely entertaining.
Courtesy of Aol News
Brobdingnagian
Main Entry: Brob·ding·nag·ianPronunciation: "bräb-di[ng]-'na-gE-&n, -dig-'na-Function:
adjectiveEtymology: Brobdingnag, imaginary land of giants in Gulliver's Travels, by Jonathan
SwiftDate: 1728: marked by tremendous size - Brobdingnagian noun
adjectiveEtymology: Brobdingnag, imaginary land of giants in Gulliver's Travels, by Jonathan
SwiftDate: 1728: marked by tremendous size - Brobdingnagian noun
Sunday, June 19, 2005
The Word
Gen 1:1 In the beginning7225 God430 created1254 (853) the heaven8064 and the earth.776
Gen 1:2 And the earth776 was1961 without form,8414 and void;922 and darkness2822 was upon5921 the face6440 of the deep.8415 And the Spirit7307 of God430 moved7363 upon5921 the face6440 of the waters.4325
Gen 1:3 And God430 said,559 Let there be1961 light:216 and there was1961 light.216
Gen 1:4 And God430 saw7200 (853) the light,216 that3588 it was good:2896 and God430 divided914, 996 the light216 from996 the darkness.2822
Gen 1:5 And God430 called7121 the light216 Day,3117 and the darkness2822 he called7121 Night.3915 And the evening6153 and the morning1242 were1961 the first259 day.3117
Gen 1:6 And God430 said,559 Let there be1961 a firmament7549 in the midst8432 of the waters,4325 and let1961 it divide914, 996 the waters4325 from the waters.4325
Gen 1:7 And God430 made6213 (853) the firmament,7549 and divided914, 996 the waters4325 which834 were under4480, 8478 the firmament7549 from996 the waters4325 which834 were above4480, 5921 the firmament:7549 and it was1961 so.3651
H430אלהים'ĕlôhîymel-o-heem'Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
H1254בּראbârâ'baw-raw'A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes): - choose, create (creator), cut down, dispatch, do, make (fat).
H2822
חשׁך
chôshek
kho-shek'
From H2821; the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness: - dark (-ness), night, obscurity.
H8414תּהוּtôhûto'-hooFrom an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
H5921על‛alalProperly the same as H5920 used as a preposition (in the singular or plural, often with prefix, or as conjugation with a particle following); above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applications: - above, according to (-ly), after, (as) against, among, and, X as, at, because of, beside (the rest of), between, beyond the time, X both and, by (reason of), X had the charge of, concerning for, in (that), (forth, out) of, (from) (off), (up-) on, over, than, through (-out), to, touching, X with.
H8415תּהם תּהוםtehôm tehômteh-home', teh-home'(Usually feminine) from H1949; an abyss (as a surging mass of water), especially the deep (the main sea or the subterranean water supply): - deep (place), depth.
H8414תּהוּtôhûto'-hooFrom an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
H216אור'ôroreFrom H215; illumination or (concretely) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.): - bright, clear, + day, light (-ning), morning, sun.
H914בּדלbâdalbaw-dal'A primitive root; to divide (in various senses literally or figuratively, separate, distinguish, differ, select, etc.): - (make, put) difference, divide (asunder), (make) separate (self, -ation), sever (out), X utterly.
H996בּיןbêynbane(Sometimes in the plural masculine or feminine); properly the constructively contracted form of an otherwise unused noun from
H995; a distinction; but used only as a preposition, between (repeated before each noun, often with other particles); also as a conjugation, either... or: - among, asunder, at, between (-twixt . . . and), + from (the widest), X in, out of, whether (it be... or), within.
H7549רקיעrâqîya‛raw-kee'-ahFrom H7554; properly an expanse, that is, the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky: - firmament.
H4325מיםmayimmah'-yimDual of a primitive noun (but used in a singular sense); water; figuratively juice; by euphemism urine, semen: - + piss, wasting, water (-ing, [-course, -flood, -spring]).
H433
אלהּ אלוהּ
'ĕlôahh 'ĕlôahh
el-o'-ah, el-o'-ah
(The second form is rare); probably prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: - God, god. See H430.
H410
אל
'êl
ale
Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): - God (god), X goodly, X great, idol, might (-y one), power, strong. Compare names in "-el."
H352
איל
'ayil
ah'-yil
From the same as H193; properly strength; hence anything strong; specifically a chief (politically); also a ram (from his strength); a pilaster (as a strong support); an oak or other strong tree: - mighty (man), lintel, oak, post, ram, tree.
H193
אוּל
'ûl
ool
From an unused root meaning to twist, that is, (by implication) be strong; the body (as being rolled together) also powerful: - mighty, strength.
I wanted to take a look at first the word deep (why is an excellent question) and for lack of a reason not to I have. In the process I ended up tracing God back 5 or so meanings which I found interesting as well. Never the less in the context of these first verses of the bible I have discovered that if you do not put priority on the exact sequence then they begin to appear in contradiction.
The deep is a nowhere place in which a [plural(limited in number rolled together) ]deity , pillar of strength who is chief from which I gather that God was one, but not one, but in complete agreement with himself.
Expect this to grow as I endeaver to totally disect these verses and provide you people with the insite as it occurs to me.
Gen 1:2 And the earth776 was1961 without form,8414 and void;922 and darkness2822 was upon5921 the face6440 of the deep.8415 And the Spirit7307 of God430 moved7363 upon5921 the face6440 of the waters.4325
Gen 1:3 And God430 said,559 Let there be1961 light:216 and there was1961 light.216
Gen 1:4 And God430 saw7200 (853) the light,216 that3588 it was good:2896 and God430 divided914, 996 the light216 from996 the darkness.2822
Gen 1:5 And God430 called7121 the light216 Day,3117 and the darkness2822 he called7121 Night.3915 And the evening6153 and the morning1242 were1961 the first259 day.3117
Gen 1:6 And God430 said,559 Let there be1961 a firmament7549 in the midst8432 of the waters,4325 and let1961 it divide914, 996 the waters4325 from the waters.4325
Gen 1:7 And God430 made6213 (853) the firmament,7549 and divided914, 996 the waters4325 which834 were under4480, 8478 the firmament7549 from996 the waters4325 which834 were above4480, 5921 the firmament:7549 and it was1961 so.3651
H430אלהים'ĕlôhîymel-o-heem'Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
H1254בּראbârâ'baw-raw'A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes): - choose, create (creator), cut down, dispatch, do, make (fat).
H2822
חשׁך
chôshek
kho-shek'
From H2821; the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness: - dark (-ness), night, obscurity.
H8414תּהוּtôhûto'-hooFrom an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
H5921על‛alalProperly the same as H5920 used as a preposition (in the singular or plural, often with prefix, or as conjugation with a particle following); above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applications: - above, according to (-ly), after, (as) against, among, and, X as, at, because of, beside (the rest of), between, beyond the time, X both and, by (reason of), X had the charge of, concerning for, in (that), (forth, out) of, (from) (off), (up-) on, over, than, through (-out), to, touching, X with.
H8415תּהם תּהוםtehôm tehômteh-home', teh-home'(Usually feminine) from H1949; an abyss (as a surging mass of water), especially the deep (the main sea or the subterranean water supply): - deep (place), depth.
H8414תּהוּtôhûto'-hooFrom an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
H216אור'ôroreFrom H215; illumination or (concretely) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.): - bright, clear, + day, light (-ning), morning, sun.
H914בּדלbâdalbaw-dal'A primitive root; to divide (in various senses literally or figuratively, separate, distinguish, differ, select, etc.): - (make, put) difference, divide (asunder), (make) separate (self, -ation), sever (out), X utterly.
H996בּיןbêynbane(Sometimes in the plural masculine or feminine); properly the constructively contracted form of an otherwise unused noun from
H995; a distinction; but used only as a preposition, between (repeated before each noun, often with other particles); also as a conjugation, either... or: - among, asunder, at, between (-twixt . . . and), + from (the widest), X in, out of, whether (it be... or), within.
H7549רקיעrâqîya‛raw-kee'-ahFrom H7554; properly an expanse, that is, the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky: - firmament.
H4325מיםmayimmah'-yimDual of a primitive noun (but used in a singular sense); water; figuratively juice; by euphemism urine, semen: - + piss, wasting, water (-ing, [-course, -flood, -spring]).
H433
אלהּ אלוהּ
'ĕlôahh 'ĕlôahh
el-o'-ah, el-o'-ah
(The second form is rare); probably prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: - God, god. See H430.
H410
אל
'êl
ale
Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): - God (god), X goodly, X great, idol, might (-y one), power, strong. Compare names in "-el."
H352
איל
'ayil
ah'-yil
From the same as H193; properly strength; hence anything strong; specifically a chief (politically); also a ram (from his strength); a pilaster (as a strong support); an oak or other strong tree: - mighty (man), lintel, oak, post, ram, tree.
H193
אוּל
'ûl
ool
From an unused root meaning to twist, that is, (by implication) be strong; the body (as being rolled together) also powerful: - mighty, strength.
I wanted to take a look at first the word deep (why is an excellent question) and for lack of a reason not to I have. In the process I ended up tracing God back 5 or so meanings which I found interesting as well. Never the less in the context of these first verses of the bible I have discovered that if you do not put priority on the exact sequence then they begin to appear in contradiction.
The deep is a nowhere place in which a [plural(limited in number rolled together) ]deity , pillar of strength who is chief from which I gather that God was one, but not one, but in complete agreement with himself.
Expect this to grow as I endeaver to totally disect these verses and provide you people with the insite as it occurs to me.
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Earth facts
It is a 4,550,000,000-year-old, 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000-tonne ball of iron.
A new study finds:
According to the new figures, the Earth weighs 5.972 sextillion -- that’s 5,972 followed by 18 zeroes -- metric tons. Previous estimates put the globe’s mass at 5.98 sextillion metric tons.
A new study finds:
According to the new figures, the Earth weighs 5.972 sextillion -- that’s 5,972 followed by 18 zeroes -- metric tons. Previous estimates put the globe’s mass at 5.98 sextillion metric tons.
Friday, June 17, 2005
Thursday, June 16, 2005
And now to micro-raise the fear factor just a little bit more
Marketing data for space minors which I stumbled across at this site about Meteors whacking the earth. I also had the good fortune to find some data to sate the amateur physicist in me.
From this I can now get a general rough estimate of the velocity that a star like unto a mountain may be traveling at the time of impact. That would be 40,000mp/hr or 60,000km/hr for the rest of you. I am still looking for diameters versus tonages for the various types of meteor's and impact data relating to these figures or at least some to estimate the particular event which man kind is speeding up to.
Iron meteorite..........Iron 91% Nickel 8.5% Cobalt 0.6%
Stony meteorite.......Oxygen 36% Iron 26% Silicon 18% Magnesium 14% Aluminum 1.5% Nickel 1.4% Calcium 1.3%
Earths Crust..........Oxygen 49% Silicon 26% Aluminum 7.5% Iron 4.7% Calcium 3.4% Sodium 2.6% Potassium 2.4% Magnesium 1.9%
An example of the possible riches amongst this rubble of the solar system is the asteroid Amun. The orbit of this mile-wide object comes close to the Earth's orbit and, over millions of years, it could be a threat to the Earth. Before then, however, it is likely that mankind will have visited the asteroid and mined it away to nothing, because research indicates Amun is made from that primordial stainless steel. Planetary Scientist John Lewis, from the University of Arizona, estimates that the iron, nickel and cobalt in this single asteroid is worth about $20,000 billion at market prices.
source: Encyclopedia Britannica
Scared yet? If not have a look at this article about the after affects of a meteor splashdown. Still not scared ? Good then if all of you micro-dick-tators wouldn't mind just moving to the pacific side of the worlds continents I would be much obliged. Go ahead I really think you could prove to me that by 2070 people who dwell in the earth have nothing to fear. HAHAHAHAHAHA!
The largest aboveground H-bomb test by the United States was like a firecracker compared to an asteroid impact. That "Bravo" explosion at Bikini Atoll in 1954 was equivalent to fifteen megatons (million tons) of TNT but was only about one-thousandth of the energy of a 500-yard asteroid moving at 50,000 mph. *
According to this work, a 500-yard-diameter asteroid is predicted to generate a water crater nearly 3 miles in diameter
An ocean impact by a 500-yard-diameter asteroid will vaporise about 20 cubic miles of water
The same impact on land would pulverise an equivalent amount of rock (20 cubic miles -- about 1,000 times the volume of the asteroid) and send much of it into the upper atmosphere, where it would circulate around the globe and disrupt agriculture for many months.
The planet was found to be covered with impact craters like the moon. One giant impact crater on Mercury was particularly interesting. Directly opposite the impact point, on the other side of the planet (called the "antipodal point") was a region of highly disrupted terrain with no evidence of an impact. The shock waves from the impact on one side of Mercury had traveled around the surface and met simultaneously at the antipodal point to create the chaotic features. Similar features have since been detected on several moons of the giant planets.
Past impacts with water or ice are very difficult to detect, because they leave very little evidence. One such impact is known to have occurred in the South Pacific Ocean, near Chile, about 2 million years ago. This event -- known as "Eltanin" after the ship that discovered the deposits -- involved an asteroid between 1 and 3 miles in diameter that would have created a water crater at least 40 miles across. Tsunami would have swamped coasts around the Pacific and would even have reached some Atlantic coastlines. Assuming a typical run-up factor of three, the coast of Chile would have been inundated by 250-yard-high tsunami. Likely results for other locations: Hawaii 90-yard tsunami (probably higher due to the greater run-up factor); California, 60 yards; Japan and Australia, 25 yards; New Zealand; 120 yards.
750 feet holy cow!
*
From this I can now get a general rough estimate of the velocity that a star like unto a mountain may be traveling at the time of impact. That would be 40,000mp/hr or 60,000km/hr for the rest of you. I am still looking for diameters versus tonages for the various types of meteor's and impact data relating to these figures or at least some to estimate the particular event which man kind is speeding up to.
Iron meteorite..........Iron 91% Nickel 8.5% Cobalt 0.6%
Stony meteorite.......Oxygen 36% Iron 26% Silicon 18% Magnesium 14% Aluminum 1.5% Nickel 1.4% Calcium 1.3%
Earths Crust..........Oxygen 49% Silicon 26% Aluminum 7.5% Iron 4.7% Calcium 3.4% Sodium 2.6% Potassium 2.4% Magnesium 1.9%
An example of the possible riches amongst this rubble of the solar system is the asteroid Amun. The orbit of this mile-wide object comes close to the Earth's orbit and, over millions of years, it could be a threat to the Earth. Before then, however, it is likely that mankind will have visited the asteroid and mined it away to nothing, because research indicates Amun is made from that primordial stainless steel. Planetary Scientist John Lewis, from the University of Arizona, estimates that the iron, nickel and cobalt in this single asteroid is worth about $20,000 billion at market prices.
source: Encyclopedia Britannica
Scared yet? If not have a look at this article about the after affects of a meteor splashdown. Still not scared ? Good then if all of you micro-dick-tators wouldn't mind just moving to the pacific side of the worlds continents I would be much obliged. Go ahead I really think you could prove to me that by 2070 people who dwell in the earth have nothing to fear. HAHAHAHAHAHA!
The largest aboveground H-bomb test by the United States was like a firecracker compared to an asteroid impact. That "Bravo" explosion at Bikini Atoll in 1954 was equivalent to fifteen megatons (million tons) of TNT but was only about one-thousandth of the energy of a 500-yard asteroid moving at 50,000 mph. *
According to this work, a 500-yard-diameter asteroid is predicted to generate a water crater nearly 3 miles in diameter
An ocean impact by a 500-yard-diameter asteroid will vaporise about 20 cubic miles of water
The same impact on land would pulverise an equivalent amount of rock (20 cubic miles -- about 1,000 times the volume of the asteroid) and send much of it into the upper atmosphere, where it would circulate around the globe and disrupt agriculture for many months.
The planet was found to be covered with impact craters like the moon. One giant impact crater on Mercury was particularly interesting. Directly opposite the impact point, on the other side of the planet (called the "antipodal point") was a region of highly disrupted terrain with no evidence of an impact. The shock waves from the impact on one side of Mercury had traveled around the surface and met simultaneously at the antipodal point to create the chaotic features. Similar features have since been detected on several moons of the giant planets.
Past impacts with water or ice are very difficult to detect, because they leave very little evidence. One such impact is known to have occurred in the South Pacific Ocean, near Chile, about 2 million years ago. This event -- known as "Eltanin" after the ship that discovered the deposits -- involved an asteroid between 1 and 3 miles in diameter that would have created a water crater at least 40 miles across. Tsunami would have swamped coasts around the Pacific and would even have reached some Atlantic coastlines. Assuming a typical run-up factor of three, the coast of Chile would have been inundated by 250-yard-high tsunami. Likely results for other locations: Hawaii 90-yard tsunami (probably higher due to the greater run-up factor); California, 60 yards; Japan and Australia, 25 yards; New Zealand; 120 yards.
750 feet holy cow!
*
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Conundrums
Here is a hypothetical conundrum.
If I in my youth was so critical of my mothers smoking that due to unknown or unforceable curses, I was cursed to smoke and I who born of a great princess; my mother, thereby inheriting great princehood and by the curses that are laid out as a defense for me, my mother was also cursed by those same curses now laid up in her bed and growing weaker also. If I quit smoking the curses that protect me having proved stronger would cause my Mother to die.
Leaving me in a place where I have the choice of quitting and by proxy of the curses killing my mother or continuing to smoke, slowly killing myself.
Which choice should I make?
By the way I am still smoking.
If I in my youth was so critical of my mothers smoking that due to unknown or unforceable curses, I was cursed to smoke and I who born of a great princess; my mother, thereby inheriting great princehood and by the curses that are laid out as a defense for me, my mother was also cursed by those same curses now laid up in her bed and growing weaker also. If I quit smoking the curses that protect me having proved stronger would cause my Mother to die.
Leaving me in a place where I have the choice of quitting and by proxy of the curses killing my mother or continuing to smoke, slowly killing myself.
Which choice should I make?
By the way I am still smoking.
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Battleships
A little exerpt from an article containing some very pertenint facts concerning something I have always believed. The battleships are not done yet. Oh and another thing I don't think we are hiring our politicians for they're math abilities. Cause I dunno but the old BB's are still the baddest honkin machines around .
By Ollie North @townhall.com (link on side bar)
Even if the Navy ordered more of the DD(X) class -- at $2 billion to $3.5 billion each -- these small, thin-skinned vessels are highly vulnerable to "sea skimmer" missiles. And a terrorist action, like the 2000 attack on the USS Cole -- which crippled the destroyer and killed 17 -- would do similar damage to a DD(X).
Naval officers admit that heavily armored battleships are practically impervious to such strikes, but claim that what the DD(X) lacks in armor it will make up in stealth and speed. To embattled Marines that just means their nearest naval gunfire support will be far out at sea and traveling at high speed -- neither of which contribute to accurate "steel on target" for troops fighting ashore.
Our Navy currently has no capability for providing the lethal, high-volume firepower that would be required if -- God forbid -- we should have to land Marines on the coasts of Iran or North Korea, or in defense of Taiwan. When the Marines assaulted Um Qasr at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003, they had to rely on naval gunfire from an Australian frigate. The Navy's answer is to wait six years for the costly, unproven ERGM system and a half-dozen or fewer, yet-to-be-built DD(X) ships. But America's enemies may not wait that long. And America's taxpayers may not want to pay the price -- in blood or treasure. The DD(X)-ERGM experiments are estimated to cost between $12 billion and $16 billion.
It would take less than two years to reactivate the Iowa and Wisconsin. The battleships are 10 percent faster than the still-conceptual DD(X). They each bring to bear 12 5-inch and nine 16-inch guns -- capable, with new munitions, of firing accurately to nearly 100 miles. The two battleships can also carry nearly twice as many cruise missiles as all the DD(X) hulls combined. All that firepower is available for $2 billion -- the cost of one DD(X).
Sometimes, as I tell my grandchildren, older is better. In the case of the two battlewagons, older is not only superior, it's also a lot less expensive
By Ollie North @townhall.com (link on side bar)
Even if the Navy ordered more of the DD(X) class -- at $2 billion to $3.5 billion each -- these small, thin-skinned vessels are highly vulnerable to "sea skimmer" missiles. And a terrorist action, like the 2000 attack on the USS Cole -- which crippled the destroyer and killed 17 -- would do similar damage to a DD(X).
Naval officers admit that heavily armored battleships are practically impervious to such strikes, but claim that what the DD(X) lacks in armor it will make up in stealth and speed. To embattled Marines that just means their nearest naval gunfire support will be far out at sea and traveling at high speed -- neither of which contribute to accurate "steel on target" for troops fighting ashore.
Our Navy currently has no capability for providing the lethal, high-volume firepower that would be required if -- God forbid -- we should have to land Marines on the coasts of Iran or North Korea, or in defense of Taiwan. When the Marines assaulted Um Qasr at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003, they had to rely on naval gunfire from an Australian frigate. The Navy's answer is to wait six years for the costly, unproven ERGM system and a half-dozen or fewer, yet-to-be-built DD(X) ships. But America's enemies may not wait that long. And America's taxpayers may not want to pay the price -- in blood or treasure. The DD(X)-ERGM experiments are estimated to cost between $12 billion and $16 billion.
It would take less than two years to reactivate the Iowa and Wisconsin. The battleships are 10 percent faster than the still-conceptual DD(X). They each bring to bear 12 5-inch and nine 16-inch guns -- capable, with new munitions, of firing accurately to nearly 100 miles. The two battleships can also carry nearly twice as many cruise missiles as all the DD(X) hulls combined. All that firepower is available for $2 billion -- the cost of one DD(X).
Sometimes, as I tell my grandchildren, older is better. In the case of the two battlewagons, older is not only superior, it's also a lot less expensive
Monday, June 13, 2005
Hero's
"Freedom must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of hero's and tyrants". Thomas Jefferson
Sunday, June 12, 2005
I am not Catholic
I remember a long time ago I had noticed that there were saints amongst all the differing branches of Christianity. this girl is Catholic and I just kindof stumbled upon her.
This is Saint Hood this is the dwelling place of Little lambs. These are the people most precious to our lord. These are the people at the front of the line as opposed to me. If I am lucky I'll end up in the middle somewhere
[ Did you receive a gift from God today?Why sure you did! You woke up, didn't you?Every new day is a gift from God. Every leaf, every sunrise, every thing is a gift. You have gifts all around you--- so start noticing them. Saint Paul tells us" What do you possess that you have not received?... You have already grown rich". So if you're so rich, enjoy it! God GAVE you life. God GAVE you the world --- and all the wonders of the earth and the sky and the sea. So what do you do when somebody gives you a gift? You enjoy it, appreciate it-- and say thanks. ]
This is Saint Hood this is the dwelling place of Little lambs. These are the people most precious to our lord. These are the people at the front of the line as opposed to me. If I am lucky I'll end up in the middle somewhere
[ Did you receive a gift from God today?Why sure you did! You woke up, didn't you?Every new day is a gift from God. Every leaf, every sunrise, every thing is a gift. You have gifts all around you--- so start noticing them. Saint Paul tells us" What do you possess that you have not received?... You have already grown rich". So if you're so rich, enjoy it! God GAVE you life. God GAVE you the world --- and all the wonders of the earth and the sky and the sea. So what do you do when somebody gives you a gift? You enjoy it, appreciate it-- and say thanks. ]
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Another article in toto
From AFR, link on side bar.
'Love Won Out' Offers Way Out for Those Entrapped by Homosexuality
By Allie MartinJune 10, 2005
(AgapePress) - A conference aimed at uncovering the truth about homosexuality takes place in Seattle later this month. Focus on Family is sponsoring its "Love Won Out" conference in the northwest metropolis on June 25.
Focus on the Family promotes the message that homosexuality is both preventable and treatable -- and maintains that such a message is "routinely silenced" these days. To overcome that obstacle, the Colorado Springs-based ministry sponsors one-day "Love Won Out" conferences at venues around the country that feature former homosexuals and other experts who tackle a wide variety of questions about the subject -- such as, Can homosexuality be prevented? Is it genetic? and What causes homosexuality?
Mike Haley is Director of the Homosexuality and Gender Department for FOTF's Public Policy Division. He says the conferences are always met with protest by homosexual activists.
"The other side hates the message that gays and lesbians can change, because it goes against the very foundation upon which their whole movement is established," Haley explains. "[They believe that] if you're born this way, then they should be allowed special and civil rights status -- and those things just aren't true."
Haley suggests that is one reason why homosexual activists dislike the message of the conferences. "[T]hey believe that what we're doing is that we're pointing the finger -- making some of the mistakes that the church has made in the past -- and we're not doing that at all," he confesses. "Indeed ... we're helping people to understand that this is a mission field that we need to reach for Christ."
Haley acknowledges that in the past, some in the body of Christ have done "very harmful" things in dealing with homosexuals. But many churches, he says, are finally dealing with the issue in a more constructive and loving way.
"Now we're coming and saying that, for those of us that were part of the gay and lesbian community, here's how better to reach us," he explains. "So what's been interesting is when gay and lesbian activists have come into the conference, one of the things they will say after the conference is, while they didn't agree with everything that was said, the tone in which it was said was very different than what they expected."
The site of the June 25 conference is Northshore Baptist Church in Seattle. Other "Love Won Out" conferences are scheduled for Birmingham, Alabama, in September, and Boston in October.
Allie Martin, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
© 2005 AgapePress all rights reserved. tag below this comment. -->
'Love Won Out' Offers Way Out for Those Entrapped by Homosexuality
By Allie MartinJune 10, 2005
(AgapePress) - A conference aimed at uncovering the truth about homosexuality takes place in Seattle later this month. Focus on Family is sponsoring its "Love Won Out" conference in the northwest metropolis on June 25.
Focus on the Family promotes the message that homosexuality is both preventable and treatable -- and maintains that such a message is "routinely silenced" these days. To overcome that obstacle, the Colorado Springs-based ministry sponsors one-day "Love Won Out" conferences at venues around the country that feature former homosexuals and other experts who tackle a wide variety of questions about the subject -- such as, Can homosexuality be prevented? Is it genetic? and What causes homosexuality?
Mike Haley is Director of the Homosexuality and Gender Department for FOTF's Public Policy Division. He says the conferences are always met with protest by homosexual activists.
"The other side hates the message that gays and lesbians can change, because it goes against the very foundation upon which their whole movement is established," Haley explains. "[They believe that] if you're born this way, then they should be allowed special and civil rights status -- and those things just aren't true."
Haley suggests that is one reason why homosexual activists dislike the message of the conferences. "[T]hey believe that what we're doing is that we're pointing the finger -- making some of the mistakes that the church has made in the past -- and we're not doing that at all," he confesses. "Indeed ... we're helping people to understand that this is a mission field that we need to reach for Christ."
Haley acknowledges that in the past, some in the body of Christ have done "very harmful" things in dealing with homosexuals. But many churches, he says, are finally dealing with the issue in a more constructive and loving way.
"Now we're coming and saying that, for those of us that were part of the gay and lesbian community, here's how better to reach us," he explains. "So what's been interesting is when gay and lesbian activists have come into the conference, one of the things they will say after the conference is, while they didn't agree with everything that was said, the tone in which it was said was very different than what they expected."
The site of the June 25 conference is Northshore Baptist Church in Seattle. Other "Love Won Out" conferences are scheduled for Birmingham, Alabama, in September, and Boston in October.
Allie Martin, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
© 2005 AgapePress all rights reserved. tag below this comment. -->
Politics
I was over at the whigs site and he has and article from( I guess )our Cousin Kyle in which Kyle makes a strong appeal for one of the basic principles of our Nation. So basic in fact that it is our national mantra which I suppose I could expound on prolifically providing plenty of links to sites showing my proof that is virtually the by word in describing our national attitude. But that is not the focus of this particular diatribe.
For a moment I thought to copy this article to my site and then dissect it inserting "the art of compromise, " where ever there was the word politic or politics. I have since thought better of it and decided to let this be only a definition, with comments.
We use the word politics in coupling with just about everything we do these days and even if we don't use the word directly we imply it. For instance in rearing our families, handing out sentences to criminals, getting along with co-workers,personal relationships including marriage which I might add today 50% of them are crap.
Compromise is a good thing in it's proper place but frankly I hate that word because I have seen Politicians practice the art of conpromise to the extreme detriment of our nation.
I am quite sure that many of you could come up with areas where compromise is not in the best interest of anyone.
To cousin Kyle sorry about this but you would have to ask Al what's up with me. He has so stated in a blog about a year ago that indeed I was a scourge. I suppose it may be so but my intent is to see that people understand that when God says all things in moderation and everything has it's place and time, it really is a matter of paying close attention to what the words really mean and not the general use of today.
We have so blurred the use of our language that it has become difficult to make a statement of fact without the fear that someone will misunderstand what is said consequently getting into some potentially crazed debate with another equally fervrent individual when you both may actually believe in the identical cause.
As far as your article and it's intent to remind us of what freedom is and to encourage us to continue to embrace it I applaud. But the word Politics cannot enter into freedom. There is no compromising freedom for to compromise it is to compromise with not freedom so you end up with only half of what you started with. To me that is half slavery. I cannot and will not live a life in half slavery. I will fight to the death over this one.
For a moment I thought to copy this article to my site and then dissect it inserting "the art of compromise, " where ever there was the word politic or politics. I have since thought better of it and decided to let this be only a definition, with comments.
We use the word politics in coupling with just about everything we do these days and even if we don't use the word directly we imply it. For instance in rearing our families, handing out sentences to criminals, getting along with co-workers,personal relationships including marriage which I might add today 50% of them are crap.
Compromise is a good thing in it's proper place but frankly I hate that word because I have seen Politicians practice the art of conpromise to the extreme detriment of our nation.
I am quite sure that many of you could come up with areas where compromise is not in the best interest of anyone.
To cousin Kyle sorry about this but you would have to ask Al what's up with me. He has so stated in a blog about a year ago that indeed I was a scourge. I suppose it may be so but my intent is to see that people understand that when God says all things in moderation and everything has it's place and time, it really is a matter of paying close attention to what the words really mean and not the general use of today.
We have so blurred the use of our language that it has become difficult to make a statement of fact without the fear that someone will misunderstand what is said consequently getting into some potentially crazed debate with another equally fervrent individual when you both may actually believe in the identical cause.
As far as your article and it's intent to remind us of what freedom is and to encourage us to continue to embrace it I applaud. But the word Politics cannot enter into freedom. There is no compromising freedom for to compromise it is to compromise with not freedom so you end up with only half of what you started with. To me that is half slavery. I cannot and will not live a life in half slavery. I will fight to the death over this one.
Since when
Something about this makes me sad or irritated or angry- I am not sure even though it doesn't effect me. Something is not right about it. Well you judge and mabey I need some input as well.
The exerpt is from Aol news.
"The Werneckes have never said that they would deny medical treatment to their daughter if she was ill and getting worse," Horne told state juvenile court Judge Carl Lewis.
Lewis called off a custody hearing scheduled for next week unless the Werneckes could present compelling evidence that Katie was still in remission. Horne said the treatments were set for next week.
The judge said that the parents would be allowed to attend the treatments but that doctors would make the decisions.
"Early evidence indicates that given opportunity to abscond with the child, they did. And no way would I give them opportunity to do that again now," the judge said.
The exerpt is from Aol news.
"The Werneckes have never said that they would deny medical treatment to their daughter if she was ill and getting worse," Horne told state juvenile court Judge Carl Lewis.
Lewis called off a custody hearing scheduled for next week unless the Werneckes could present compelling evidence that Katie was still in remission. Horne said the treatments were set for next week.
The judge said that the parents would be allowed to attend the treatments but that doctors would make the decisions.
"Early evidence indicates that given opportunity to abscond with the child, they did. And no way would I give them opportunity to do that again now," the judge said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
