I'm going back to college tomorrow, and I couldn't be happier or more nervous about it. I hope I can sleep tonight, but there's just so much to think about. Some random blips:
I'm so glad to be able to see everyone again, even though I didn't take the initiative in socializing much last year. So many familiar faces, so much prospect. Although I'm still nervous and inwardly awkward as all hell. I know academics are my first priority, but still, I'm excited about actually having a life this year :)
My Chinese is nowhere near as good as it should be. I didn't catch up far enough, but I've made progress. I think I got the hang of practicing so I should be able to catch up this year. Hopefully I'll do well enough to study abroad (in China, if that wasn't obvious enough).
I wanted a comfy chair and better clothes in time for the first few days :( Still, I can get those things myself sooner or later, and I've got my own room now, and all the advantages that come with it.
My blog posts have been lagging behind. I'm going to get up to speed on that regardless of how busy it gets in the near future. Expect another Genesis reading this weekend. We'll learn all about the Fall. Joy of joys. (It is actually fun to write these reviews.)
I'm living on the third floor. O_O I should have checked if there was an elevator. Either way I hope the check-in help is willing to do some heavy lifting.
Very befuddled at the moment, but that's to be expected when you're excited. I can't wait to see everyone again.
See you guys soon! :D
Friday, August 28, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
John Carpenter's "The Thing" makes a lot more sense now...
I'll never question why they had flamethrowers at an Antarctic research station anymore. I know why we'd need one here.
I just got home from the shore, and there wasn't a lot of food in the upstairs fridge, so I went to get some chicken wings out of the basement freezer. This proved to be a problem. The freezer door was frozen shut. I had to keep jerking at the handle until the door popped open, spilling ice everywhere, and I don't mean ice cubes. I mean the freezer was lined with a sheet of dripped ice. Somehow a lot of water had gotten into the freezer interior and covered everything inside. The bags of frozen vegetables had globs of ice clinging to them, and the boxes of wings and potato skins had been encased in ice. Thankfully the wings were at the bottom and didn't get a lot of the ice on the box itself, but that meant having to chisel my way through the rest of the boxes on top. And I did not want to cut myself on a sheet of ice.
That explains the flamethrowers. This is what I have to deal with here, indoors, in New Jersey, during the summer. Imagine what they'd have to deal with at the bottom of the fucking planet.
Well the wings and potato skins are in a better freezer now, so they should be good for later. I have to keep this scenario in mind when I'm getting a mini-fridge for my dorm room. Last year our fridge was really more of a freezer, and we could never get the dial at the right temperature. That meant any ice cream that was put in there would either turn into what looked like freezer-burned pineapples (it was actually cookie dough), or it would melt instantly and seep through the container. And ice cream soup is not as good as some would claim it is. So I'll be sure to get something more suitable for lots of Stewart's root beer and, on occasion, ice cream.
Or I could get a flamethrower.
"Dammit, Childs, torch it!"
I just got home from the shore, and there wasn't a lot of food in the upstairs fridge, so I went to get some chicken wings out of the basement freezer. This proved to be a problem. The freezer door was frozen shut. I had to keep jerking at the handle until the door popped open, spilling ice everywhere, and I don't mean ice cubes. I mean the freezer was lined with a sheet of dripped ice. Somehow a lot of water had gotten into the freezer interior and covered everything inside. The bags of frozen vegetables had globs of ice clinging to them, and the boxes of wings and potato skins had been encased in ice. Thankfully the wings were at the bottom and didn't get a lot of the ice on the box itself, but that meant having to chisel my way through the rest of the boxes on top. And I did not want to cut myself on a sheet of ice.
That explains the flamethrowers. This is what I have to deal with here, indoors, in New Jersey, during the summer. Imagine what they'd have to deal with at the bottom of the fucking planet.
Well the wings and potato skins are in a better freezer now, so they should be good for later. I have to keep this scenario in mind when I'm getting a mini-fridge for my dorm room. Last year our fridge was really more of a freezer, and we could never get the dial at the right temperature. That meant any ice cream that was put in there would either turn into what looked like freezer-burned pineapples (it was actually cookie dough), or it would melt instantly and seep through the container. And ice cream soup is not as good as some would claim it is. So I'll be sure to get something more suitable for lots of Stewart's root beer and, on occasion, ice cream.
Or I could get a flamethrower.
"Dammit, Childs, torch it!"
Monday, August 24, 2009
Still more personal uncertainty.
These last few days, the procrastination dial has been turned way up. I haven't even been responsible enough to keep studying Chinese, which I actually like doing. At least I know how I'm going to keep up on class material from now on. I've got to get my act together and actually live up to the "student" status I claim to have. This is especially true if I'm going to study in China next year. My GPA isn't good enough right now, so I really need to start getting A's, something I'm not at all accustomed to.
And this is most probably going to be especially difficult since I'm taking four classes again instead of three, not including the phys-ed course I finally managed to sign up for in one block this semester. Two of the other classes are pretty much variations of my Chinese studies, one being International Relations, and the other simply being US/China Relations. I'm hoping this actually leads somewhere, since it's the first legitimate interest I've shown in an actual field of study.
The fourth class is an anthropology class about female sexuality, because I feel as though I ought to be more knowledgeable in something I've been raised to be completely ignorant of. Really, when you're raised in a conservative Catholic household - where sexuality is a focal point of guilt, and where the epitome of female virtue is an obedient, subservient virgin whose greatest achievement is humbly allowing a sky god to impregnate her - you'll soon realize you know absolutely nothing about human nature in general, much less complex issues of sexuality. I also have a personal reason for trying to learn about this. Like I said before, I didn't learn anything worthwhile about my own sexuality or that of others when I grew up, to the point where I was misinformed into believing that homosexuality was a mental disorder. And my own lack of personal intuition ensures that I can't figure out anything on my own. I need resources and experience, and since the latter is sorely lacking, I'm hoping I'll have access to more of the former.
I really have no clue where my studies are leading me. I'm just hoping something can get through to me to get some idea of what I'm going to do with my life. East Asian studies sounds interesting and meaningful enough, so I'm going for it.
As for my social life... I know that for me it's not as simple as pursuing my work and letting the rest unfold itself, but I have to set my priorities. And my first priority is my academics. I do hope something good comes about in the meantime.
And this is most probably going to be especially difficult since I'm taking four classes again instead of three, not including the phys-ed course I finally managed to sign up for in one block this semester. Two of the other classes are pretty much variations of my Chinese studies, one being International Relations, and the other simply being US/China Relations. I'm hoping this actually leads somewhere, since it's the first legitimate interest I've shown in an actual field of study.
The fourth class is an anthropology class about female sexuality, because I feel as though I ought to be more knowledgeable in something I've been raised to be completely ignorant of. Really, when you're raised in a conservative Catholic household - where sexuality is a focal point of guilt, and where the epitome of female virtue is an obedient, subservient virgin whose greatest achievement is humbly allowing a sky god to impregnate her - you'll soon realize you know absolutely nothing about human nature in general, much less complex issues of sexuality. I also have a personal reason for trying to learn about this. Like I said before, I didn't learn anything worthwhile about my own sexuality or that of others when I grew up, to the point where I was misinformed into believing that homosexuality was a mental disorder. And my own lack of personal intuition ensures that I can't figure out anything on my own. I need resources and experience, and since the latter is sorely lacking, I'm hoping I'll have access to more of the former.
I really have no clue where my studies are leading me. I'm just hoping something can get through to me to get some idea of what I'm going to do with my life. East Asian studies sounds interesting and meaningful enough, so I'm going for it.
As for my social life... I know that for me it's not as simple as pursuing my work and letting the rest unfold itself, but I have to set my priorities. And my first priority is my academics. I do hope something good comes about in the meantime.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Doodlemastery Bible School: Part 2: God's Image = dirt
"If you're descended from monkeys, does that make you think you can act like one?"
No, the truth is much more hopeful. You see, our Lord God saw fit to craft us from dirt. Which means we should act like... dirt... human... things... with ghosts...
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can go through their whole lives and not notice that loop in logic. And also never care to learn the difference between monkeys and apes. Just to make it simple: monkey -> tail; ape -> no tail. Not to mention the denial of our nature as apes. Being an animal biologically does not imply anything about our behavior, no more than a cheetah can be expected to be a house cat.
Now with that little bit of ignorance out of the way, let's resume our reading with Genesis, Chapter 2.
So the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the furniture in them. (Genesis 2:1)
God's done some remodeling. The last time we saw creation it was an empty world that was somehow full of water at the same time.
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work he had done.
And he blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. (2:2-3)
This is the only time I've ever seen anyone create a holiday for not doing anything. How exactly can a celestial being "rest"? Does that just mean he refrained from doing anything? What about sustaining existence through his willpower? If that's not considered an action, then neither is creating anything since it's all done the same way, with God willing it to happen. And by that same token everything that ever happens is a direct result of God's will, so he's responsible for everything. That will be important to remember for later. Very, very important.
These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth: (2:4)
Right off the bat we have a contradiction with Chapter 1. Right there, clear as daylight, it says that God created the heavens and the earth in a day. A single day. And it's on that day that he does all the things that follow in this chapter. Even though just a few verses ago we had this whole spiel about the six days of creation. Chapter 2 even begins by saying that God finished creation on the seventh day. This sounds a lot like two creations myths smashed together with a few verses left in the second chapter. Seamless transition, isn't it? Maybe I'm being too harsh. Let's see what else the chapter has to add to the account of our creation.
And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew: for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth and there was not a man to till the earth. (2:5)
Apparently this is before God invented rain. He just held the water vapor up in our atmosphere with his magical firmament. I suppose that's easy for a theist to accept. The guy is God, after all. And good job pointing out that humankind predates agriculture. Even though agriculture also predates this creation myth, by a couple dozen thousand years.
But a spring rose out of the earth, and watering all the surface of the earth. (2:6)
In a more interesting creation myth, this is where the earth's water would break and the earth would have birth pangs before giving birth to the first life or a god warrior or some crazy shit like that. Amazingly what we get instead is even more distasteful than birth metaphors.
And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (2:7)
Ewww. Our first ancestors were made from slime? Say what you will about the human body and its reproductive system, making human beings out of slime from the riverside is pretty damn disgusting. Why did God see fit to craft us out of this naturally occurring smegma? He could have just, you know, conjured us up out of nothing. He did the same thing for the rest of creation, so why the all-natural sculpting all of a sudden? Why did he reserve this treatment for a species supposedly created in his image, complete with an immortal soul? You could say that this is God's way of making something partially divine out of something as simple as clay, but if God were said to have made us out of stardust would the interpretation have any different result? It's like the Barnum Effect. You could say anything about the way we were created and interpret it into something beautiful if you really want it to be.
Or you could interpret it into something that views humanity as being the equivalent of dirt, which some guilt-driven individuals would have no problem with.
And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed. (2:8)
Oooo, a paradise of pleasure? Ah not so fast, hedonists, no such luck in a story like this. There's nothing in this text that suggests pleasure includes anything, um... pleasurable. Apparently pleasure in this context entails having enough to eat and not dying. As much of an improvement as that would be for the many, many starving and dying people all around the world, that actually sounds pretty boring. How did God decide on this as being paradise? He couldn't even let us... you know... have fun? Eh? Know what I mean, know what I mean? Nudge nudge, nudge nudge, say no more.
And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (2:9)
I'd be an ass and say that trees were created before humankind, but it's probably just a way of saying that the trees were created beforehand. What's notable here is the addition of the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The footnotes at the bottom of the page describe the tree of life as giving anyone who ate of its fruit perfect health and continuous life. It's the biblical philosopher's stone. The tree of knowledge is simply described as being the one "To which the deceitful serpent falsely attributed the power of imparting a superior kind of knowledge, beyond that which God was pleased to give." If you've never heard of this creation myth before, you're going to be confused as hell when you first read that. "The deceitful serpent"? What deceitful serpent? In a few moments we'll get into the details of this particular tree and the nature of all the trees mentioned in this chapter.
This is just riveting stuff, isn't it? EPIC BOTANY.
And a river went out of the place of pleasure to water paradise, which from thence is divided into four heads.
The name of the one is Phison: that is it which compasseth all the land of Hevilath, where gold groweth.
And the gold of that land is very good: there is found bdellium, and the onyx stone. (2:10-12)
Gold doesn't groweth, my Lord God. It's not physically possible. Gold just sits there. It's probably a figure of speech describing plentiful reserves of wealth, but it's still a primitive way of putting it. Very precise point of gold being very good, too, because indeed, gold is awesome. Although it's next to useless in the hands of people who look on it as nothing more than a rare and shiny metal.
And I have no idea what bdellium is.
And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia.
And the name of the third river is Tigris: the same passeth along by the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates. (2:13-14)
It's amazing that I still remember where these rivers are. At least the Tigris and Euphrates. These rivers run through what is now Iraq, formerly the site of the earliest civilizations. It was even called the "cradle of life" for its historical significance to humankind. A natural starting point for a creation myth centered on the Middle East. This does however tether this story to actual locations that can be traced geographically. And in case you hadn't noticed, the Garden of Eden, the paradise we're reading about here, simply doesn't exist. God's inspired authors said paradise lies somewhere in the Mesopotamian, and such a place doesn't and never has existed. If it did it would have left a trace. Or maybe God is being ever-so-sneaky again, obliterating earthly paradise to dust before we can inspect it. Ah well. On with the reading.
And the Lord God took man, and put him into paradise of pleasure, to dress it, and to keep it. (2:15)
Keep it how? It's paradise. It's supposed to be perfect. And you know men, they're just going to turn the whole place into a mess. But God will take care of that in a few moments.
And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, though shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death. (2:16-17)
Now, my mortal advice might not be worth much, but I think this might be God's first honest mistake here. There's a certain tree which causes those who eat of it to become mortal and die. Why put it there in the first place? It's not doing anything constructive. It's just sitting there, soaking up sun and water, producing fruit no one can eat, and just generally being evil. Does this tree serve any purpose other than to fuck with people? I've heard people trying to reinterpret this passage to refer to free will itself, and even then that's a really steep and unfair scenario to put someone in, especially if that person has existed for just a few minutes. It's like building a house in a nice neighborhood, selling it to decent law-abiding people, telling them how to live in it and make it their home, with one condition: that there is a button - in easy reach, in the living room - which they may not under any circumstances push or tamper with, since it activates a nuclear bomb built into the basement of the house. You can't say that's entirely the owners' responsibility. Any sane individual would move out immediately, call the authorities, and have those responsible for the death machine in the basement arrested.
Although in this situation, no one can prosecute God. With great power comes great responsibility, but with infinite power comes the ability to screw with people.
And what's with these magical trees? Are there only two of them? Is there a genetic sequence associated with the Tree of Life so that one could replicate its amazing health benefits? Or is the whole issue of trees just an extended metaphor for human actions? What were the other trees supposed to be if not ordinary plants that one could eat fruit from?
I think the Bible's message is clear. The sooner we realize that trees are all probably evil traps and just destroy every last one of them, the better off we'll be, really.
And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone; let us make him a help like unto himself. (2:18)
I didn't screw that up, it's in the edition I have. This was approved by the Catholic Church, by the Archbishop of New York in 1941. "Let us make him a help like unto himself." Speaks for itself, doesn't it?
And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name. (2:19)
So all the other animals were made out of dirt too, huh? Does that put us on par with the animals, my neighborly biblical literalists? No, on second thought, I retract that question, since if I ask it then I'll get caught in a vacuous discussion about the difference between spiritual souls and non-spiritual souls. I'll bet you didn't even know of such a thing. Yeah, apparently animals have souls, but not immortal souls. So souls can die... Huh. Makes you want to just sit down and take biology again.
Oh by the way, the Adam in question is the first man we read about earlier. Didn't we mention that? No? Eh, fuck it.
And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field: but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself. (2:20)
A helper? Oh, you mean a help! Keep your grammar consistent, my biblical friend. So Adam named all of the animals that live on the land? Zoologists are still busy doing that today, so nice job, you ancestral ass-hat. Also, it's strange that God would think that animals would be suitable partners for the first human being. Very strange considering that bestiality will be explicitly forbidden later on, but we'll get into that another time. Better than nothing, I suppose. ... What? I don't... you know, I'm just saying that... someone, in that situation, might... Christ, nevermind. We can't talk hypothetically anymore, can we?
Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. (2:21)
???
And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam. (2:22)
...
This is a weird book.
And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. (2:23)
Okay, forgiving the skeletal reconstruction earlier, this is horseshit. Nothing other than patriarchal myths like this suggests that the human species can be derived naturally from full-blooded males. It's biologically impossible. Human beings and most other mammals have two chromosomes, one from each parent. About half inherit two "X" chromosomes, which generally makes that half of the population female; the other approximate half inherits one X chromosome and one Y chromosome, making that half male. The Y chromosome is a special genetic sequence only about half the population has. You can't get an XX pair entirely from an XY chromosome. That would be a hell of a mutation. Nearly everyone has an X chromosome, and having that chromosome paired alone technically makes one female. If anything, we are all derived from women. I say "technically" since God apparently fucked up in a minority of cases. An XX chromosome may still make one male, and an XY chromosome female. And there are still other chromosome pairs with various effects on one's gender. Sexuality and gender are very complicated matters. Many Christians would do well to remember that.
And the asserted origin of the word "women" is just as idiotic. I don't know about the original ancient Hebrew vocabulary, but English is a Germanic language. The German word for man or person, "Mann", comes from the gender-independent word for a human being, male or female, in an earlier form of German. The modern word "woman" comes from this older German, the original term being "Wiffmann"; for a man, the word was "Weremann". You know, as in "werewolf".
This is absolutely fascinating.
Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. (2:24)
Yes! Haha! I knew there would be "pleasure"! Oh wait, this isn't talking about now instead of back then, is it? So being "one flesh" is still forbidden in paradise? Dammit! You know, if this was how it was going to be, I'd look forward to the Fall. What's living forever if you can't ever get it on?
I can't stand how this passage alone is considered enough for people to be convinced that only heterosexual sex should be allowed. You know, sex does more than one thing. It doesn't only make babies. It can be for pleasure, for health, or you could just do it out of sheer boredom. And if you're looking for a divine sanction for something you should be able to work out on your own, it'd better be in a far more impressive display than this bizarre ancient tale.
And they were both naked, to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed. (2:25)
Is that good or bad? I ask because in the next chapter ignorance and knowledge become key parts of the destiny of humankind. I'd say that being content and not at all repulsed by the human body is a good thing, but often you'll find Christians saying that you can't be going around strutting your stuff. Is that only because we're in the age after the Fall? Shouldn't we be striving toward better appreciation of ourselves? Or is ignorance a virtue, and knowledge something that makes our bodies unclean?
That's an interesting message: being ignorant of the world's workings will make the shame go away.
That explains why abstinence never brought me any closer to God.
No, the truth is much more hopeful. You see, our Lord God saw fit to craft us from dirt. Which means we should act like... dirt... human... things... with ghosts...
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can go through their whole lives and not notice that loop in logic. And also never care to learn the difference between monkeys and apes. Just to make it simple: monkey -> tail; ape -> no tail. Not to mention the denial of our nature as apes. Being an animal biologically does not imply anything about our behavior, no more than a cheetah can be expected to be a house cat.
Now with that little bit of ignorance out of the way, let's resume our reading with Genesis, Chapter 2.
So the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the furniture in them. (Genesis 2:1)
God's done some remodeling. The last time we saw creation it was an empty world that was somehow full of water at the same time.
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work he had done.
And he blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. (2:2-3)
This is the only time I've ever seen anyone create a holiday for not doing anything. How exactly can a celestial being "rest"? Does that just mean he refrained from doing anything? What about sustaining existence through his willpower? If that's not considered an action, then neither is creating anything since it's all done the same way, with God willing it to happen. And by that same token everything that ever happens is a direct result of God's will, so he's responsible for everything. That will be important to remember for later. Very, very important.
These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth: (2:4)
Right off the bat we have a contradiction with Chapter 1. Right there, clear as daylight, it says that God created the heavens and the earth in a day. A single day. And it's on that day that he does all the things that follow in this chapter. Even though just a few verses ago we had this whole spiel about the six days of creation. Chapter 2 even begins by saying that God finished creation on the seventh day. This sounds a lot like two creations myths smashed together with a few verses left in the second chapter. Seamless transition, isn't it? Maybe I'm being too harsh. Let's see what else the chapter has to add to the account of our creation.
And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew: for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth and there was not a man to till the earth. (2:5)
Apparently this is before God invented rain. He just held the water vapor up in our atmosphere with his magical firmament. I suppose that's easy for a theist to accept. The guy is God, after all. And good job pointing out that humankind predates agriculture. Even though agriculture also predates this creation myth, by a couple dozen thousand years.
But a spring rose out of the earth, and watering all the surface of the earth. (2:6)
In a more interesting creation myth, this is where the earth's water would break and the earth would have birth pangs before giving birth to the first life or a god warrior or some crazy shit like that. Amazingly what we get instead is even more distasteful than birth metaphors.
And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (2:7)
Ewww. Our first ancestors were made from slime? Say what you will about the human body and its reproductive system, making human beings out of slime from the riverside is pretty damn disgusting. Why did God see fit to craft us out of this naturally occurring smegma? He could have just, you know, conjured us up out of nothing. He did the same thing for the rest of creation, so why the all-natural sculpting all of a sudden? Why did he reserve this treatment for a species supposedly created in his image, complete with an immortal soul? You could say that this is God's way of making something partially divine out of something as simple as clay, but if God were said to have made us out of stardust would the interpretation have any different result? It's like the Barnum Effect. You could say anything about the way we were created and interpret it into something beautiful if you really want it to be.
Or you could interpret it into something that views humanity as being the equivalent of dirt, which some guilt-driven individuals would have no problem with.
And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed. (2:8)
Oooo, a paradise of pleasure? Ah not so fast, hedonists, no such luck in a story like this. There's nothing in this text that suggests pleasure includes anything, um... pleasurable. Apparently pleasure in this context entails having enough to eat and not dying. As much of an improvement as that would be for the many, many starving and dying people all around the world, that actually sounds pretty boring. How did God decide on this as being paradise? He couldn't even let us... you know... have fun? Eh? Know what I mean, know what I mean? Nudge nudge, nudge nudge, say no more.
And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (2:9)
I'd be an ass and say that trees were created before humankind, but it's probably just a way of saying that the trees were created beforehand. What's notable here is the addition of the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The footnotes at the bottom of the page describe the tree of life as giving anyone who ate of its fruit perfect health and continuous life. It's the biblical philosopher's stone. The tree of knowledge is simply described as being the one "To which the deceitful serpent falsely attributed the power of imparting a superior kind of knowledge, beyond that which God was pleased to give." If you've never heard of this creation myth before, you're going to be confused as hell when you first read that. "The deceitful serpent"? What deceitful serpent? In a few moments we'll get into the details of this particular tree and the nature of all the trees mentioned in this chapter.
This is just riveting stuff, isn't it? EPIC BOTANY.
And a river went out of the place of pleasure to water paradise, which from thence is divided into four heads.
The name of the one is Phison: that is it which compasseth all the land of Hevilath, where gold groweth.
And the gold of that land is very good: there is found bdellium, and the onyx stone. (2:10-12)
Gold doesn't groweth, my Lord God. It's not physically possible. Gold just sits there. It's probably a figure of speech describing plentiful reserves of wealth, but it's still a primitive way of putting it. Very precise point of gold being very good, too, because indeed, gold is awesome. Although it's next to useless in the hands of people who look on it as nothing more than a rare and shiny metal.
And I have no idea what bdellium is.
And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia.
And the name of the third river is Tigris: the same passeth along by the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates. (2:13-14)
It's amazing that I still remember where these rivers are. At least the Tigris and Euphrates. These rivers run through what is now Iraq, formerly the site of the earliest civilizations. It was even called the "cradle of life" for its historical significance to humankind. A natural starting point for a creation myth centered on the Middle East. This does however tether this story to actual locations that can be traced geographically. And in case you hadn't noticed, the Garden of Eden, the paradise we're reading about here, simply doesn't exist. God's inspired authors said paradise lies somewhere in the Mesopotamian, and such a place doesn't and never has existed. If it did it would have left a trace. Or maybe God is being ever-so-sneaky again, obliterating earthly paradise to dust before we can inspect it. Ah well. On with the reading.
And the Lord God took man, and put him into paradise of pleasure, to dress it, and to keep it. (2:15)
Keep it how? It's paradise. It's supposed to be perfect. And you know men, they're just going to turn the whole place into a mess. But God will take care of that in a few moments.
And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, though shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death. (2:16-17)
Now, my mortal advice might not be worth much, but I think this might be God's first honest mistake here. There's a certain tree which causes those who eat of it to become mortal and die. Why put it there in the first place? It's not doing anything constructive. It's just sitting there, soaking up sun and water, producing fruit no one can eat, and just generally being evil. Does this tree serve any purpose other than to fuck with people? I've heard people trying to reinterpret this passage to refer to free will itself, and even then that's a really steep and unfair scenario to put someone in, especially if that person has existed for just a few minutes. It's like building a house in a nice neighborhood, selling it to decent law-abiding people, telling them how to live in it and make it their home, with one condition: that there is a button - in easy reach, in the living room - which they may not under any circumstances push or tamper with, since it activates a nuclear bomb built into the basement of the house. You can't say that's entirely the owners' responsibility. Any sane individual would move out immediately, call the authorities, and have those responsible for the death machine in the basement arrested.
Although in this situation, no one can prosecute God. With great power comes great responsibility, but with infinite power comes the ability to screw with people.
And what's with these magical trees? Are there only two of them? Is there a genetic sequence associated with the Tree of Life so that one could replicate its amazing health benefits? Or is the whole issue of trees just an extended metaphor for human actions? What were the other trees supposed to be if not ordinary plants that one could eat fruit from?
I think the Bible's message is clear. The sooner we realize that trees are all probably evil traps and just destroy every last one of them, the better off we'll be, really.
And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone; let us make him a help like unto himself. (2:18)
I didn't screw that up, it's in the edition I have. This was approved by the Catholic Church, by the Archbishop of New York in 1941. "Let us make him a help like unto himself." Speaks for itself, doesn't it?
And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name. (2:19)
So all the other animals were made out of dirt too, huh? Does that put us on par with the animals, my neighborly biblical literalists? No, on second thought, I retract that question, since if I ask it then I'll get caught in a vacuous discussion about the difference between spiritual souls and non-spiritual souls. I'll bet you didn't even know of such a thing. Yeah, apparently animals have souls, but not immortal souls. So souls can die... Huh. Makes you want to just sit down and take biology again.
Oh by the way, the Adam in question is the first man we read about earlier. Didn't we mention that? No? Eh, fuck it.
And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field: but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself. (2:20)
A helper? Oh, you mean a help! Keep your grammar consistent, my biblical friend. So Adam named all of the animals that live on the land? Zoologists are still busy doing that today, so nice job, you ancestral ass-hat. Also, it's strange that God would think that animals would be suitable partners for the first human being. Very strange considering that bestiality will be explicitly forbidden later on, but we'll get into that another time. Better than nothing, I suppose. ... What? I don't... you know, I'm just saying that... someone, in that situation, might... Christ, nevermind. We can't talk hypothetically anymore, can we?
Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. (2:21)
???
And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam. (2:22)
...
This is a weird book.
And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. (2:23)
Okay, forgiving the skeletal reconstruction earlier, this is horseshit. Nothing other than patriarchal myths like this suggests that the human species can be derived naturally from full-blooded males. It's biologically impossible. Human beings and most other mammals have two chromosomes, one from each parent. About half inherit two "X" chromosomes, which generally makes that half of the population female; the other approximate half inherits one X chromosome and one Y chromosome, making that half male. The Y chromosome is a special genetic sequence only about half the population has. You can't get an XX pair entirely from an XY chromosome. That would be a hell of a mutation. Nearly everyone has an X chromosome, and having that chromosome paired alone technically makes one female. If anything, we are all derived from women. I say "technically" since God apparently fucked up in a minority of cases. An XX chromosome may still make one male, and an XY chromosome female. And there are still other chromosome pairs with various effects on one's gender. Sexuality and gender are very complicated matters. Many Christians would do well to remember that.
And the asserted origin of the word "women" is just as idiotic. I don't know about the original ancient Hebrew vocabulary, but English is a Germanic language. The German word for man or person, "Mann", comes from the gender-independent word for a human being, male or female, in an earlier form of German. The modern word "woman" comes from this older German, the original term being "Wiffmann"; for a man, the word was "Weremann". You know, as in "werewolf".
This is absolutely fascinating.
Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. (2:24)
Yes! Haha! I knew there would be "pleasure"! Oh wait, this isn't talking about now instead of back then, is it? So being "one flesh" is still forbidden in paradise? Dammit! You know, if this was how it was going to be, I'd look forward to the Fall. What's living forever if you can't ever get it on?
I can't stand how this passage alone is considered enough for people to be convinced that only heterosexual sex should be allowed. You know, sex does more than one thing. It doesn't only make babies. It can be for pleasure, for health, or you could just do it out of sheer boredom. And if you're looking for a divine sanction for something you should be able to work out on your own, it'd better be in a far more impressive display than this bizarre ancient tale.
And they were both naked, to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed. (2:25)
Is that good or bad? I ask because in the next chapter ignorance and knowledge become key parts of the destiny of humankind. I'd say that being content and not at all repulsed by the human body is a good thing, but often you'll find Christians saying that you can't be going around strutting your stuff. Is that only because we're in the age after the Fall? Shouldn't we be striving toward better appreciation of ourselves? Or is ignorance a virtue, and knowledge something that makes our bodies unclean?
That's an interesting message: being ignorant of the world's workings will make the shame go away.
That explains why abstinence never brought me any closer to God.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
The hand of fate.
After walking past the ocean washing up on the boardwalk's edge and flooding the beach, the only thing more exciting would have to be connecting with the unseen and mysterious workings of the spirit realm. Or a trip to the local psychic's office would be good too.
I should probably avoid saying who this psychic is, but I will say that according to her information card leaflet thing, she's been using her "God given gift to help people through meditation and spiritual guidance" for over 45 years, and offers to "help you or a loved one in matters of love, business, divorce, depression, finding your life path or reuniting with a soulmate." Sweet. Oh wait, that's bad. It's a really bad idea to get personal advice from anyone other than a certified expert or a close friend.
But maybe I presume too much. After all she's been doing this for 45 years, which means she's either an expert in tapping into the fabric of the universe or she's pulling off the longest con I've ever taken note of. The decor of her boardwalk-side office no longer includes the smoke fountain I mentioned in the last post, but it does have religious icons from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and just tokens of astrology bullshit. I didn't find out anything about my horoscope, or my zodiac sign, which is a month off anyway.
I only got one palm reading, as this particular psychic's services are rather expensive. Palm readings are $10 each palm. Playing card readings are $25. Tarot card readings are $35 for a half deck and $45 for a full deck. Crystal readings are $75. And life charts are a whopping $125. Jesus fish! No wonder there are plaques adorning her walls commemorating her business achievements. She gets the big bucks single-handed for giving no real services whatsoever. I love how the "crystal reading" is such a big deal, even though you're essentially looking intently at a big piece of naturally occurring glass. Why are crystals hyped up to such a lofty position in the New Age movement? There's no significant properties in them. Now I could afford either a palm reading and a playing card reading, a half deck tarot card reading, or I could just get the palm reading and get something to eat. And since I don't support this establishment in any way whatsoever, it would be better to save as much money on this inanity as possible.
After waiting for a short while, I was at last able to see the psychic herself. This was the first time I'd actually laid eyes on her despite seeing her office for years, since she keeps herself hidden from passerby in a separate room. A clever marketing ploy, much like Cloverfield. She was a middle-aged Hispanic woman. Spoilers. She proceeded to do the palm reading. I have no idea how this is supposed to work. She's looking at the folds in my hand and somehow divines future meaning in them. Is there some genetic disposition that leads to certain aspects of my life that also leads to certain creases in my hands? Do events in the future bend the fabric of time to make these folds in my hands appear? What exactly is going on here? It can't just be a guessing game, can it? No, it's more like a guessing game and cold reading. John Edward would be proud.
And so, the reading. First, she pointed out my lifeline. Apparently I can ask the audience. Actually what she pointed out was that I will live to be 80 years old. I'd make a joke about testing that out by trying to do myself in right away, but it's more appropriate to point out that anyone taking this proclamation seriously would take it to mean they're invulnerable to life-threatening harm until they reach that age.
Interestingly she said I could read other people's palms. Really? Is this a secret ability? Do I have to go to a university or get some special training to understand it? Or am I only able to do it intuitively? How come I'm able to do it and not others? Did God decide I should be given this ability? Or do I have a high midichlorian count that lets me communicate with the Force? Hell, maybe I should do my own palm readings. Save myself ten bucks.
She said I have the ability to see spirits. Fuck, why don't I just become a paranormal investigator or some real life equivalent of Edward Carnby? Well, other than possibly my dead cat (which I'm pretty sure was actually just a step ladder I didn't get a good look at), I haven't seen any spirits. Maybe I just need to believe. I mean, the sign to the entrance did say that the psychic "has the right to not do readings for anyone she does not feel positive with." That's fine, it's her business, she can choose who she works with. But what exactly does it mean to be "positive"? Hell, I was a skeptic and an atheist going in and coming out of that place. Surely she could sense the negative energies.
She said I would be living in Pennsylvania, then asked where I come from. Why bother asking me? She should know, she's a goddamn psychic. I said New Jersey, and she confirmed her previous statement that I would be living in Pennsylvania, or Delaware. First of all, that's a really easy guess. I come from New Jersey, so sooner or later I'm going to spend some time in Pennsylvania. But why in the hell did her mind take a detour to Delaware for a second? That's another state away. Why would she second-guess where my future home would be?
She said I had marks of writing in my fingertips. Signs that I've been writing, with my hands? Noooo! Evidently I'm supposed to write inspirational stuff. Well that would be nice, but so far I just write random shit on my blog making fun of irrational belief systems and reviewing entertainment and just anything that comes into my head. At least I still occasionally get messages from people on YouTube saying they were inspired by comments I wrote on a George Carlin video. Comments I wrote a year or so back. Some people have way too much time on their hands.
She said I had "a positive loveline". ... What the hell is that supposed to mean? That I can fall in love? That it's within my human capacity? That's great, she informed me that I'm not a heartless sociopath. What are the odds? She continued that I "just need to open up a bit more". I can see why she has such a shining record as someone who gives relationship advice. I paid $10 for that little nugget. She couldn't have sensed that I'm, you know, ever so mildly autistic. I know you can't tell that right away from talking to me, but that's my point. If she had any special advice to offer, I wouldn't have to tell her that I'm an aspie. Otherwise she's little more than an unqualified counselor.
She even asked me if I was in a relationship, and when I said not as of yet, she said I could expect a love interest this August or September, if I "opened up" of course. I'm a single college student, and a virgin. Obviously I'm looking forward to going back, and hoping for the best when it comes to closer relationships. So naturally the response to such a visitor is wishing them luck in finding love soon, but this is supposed to be more than just well-wishing. It's supposed to be actual love advice. And it's so bland and predictable, and easily falsifiable. Watch, nothing's going to happen that quickly. It would have been something if she said I was actually going to have to wait until February or something to meet the right person. Or hell, maybe a year or two. But we wouldn't want to be realistic, would we? No, we need to feed people's desires as we drain their cash.
Continuing to draw out my path in life, she said I should look into engineering. I said I had never done anything related to it, and she predictably told me to open up to it. I'm sure my own ambitions or the advice of my academic counselors pale in comparison to the wisdom this woman has offered as a result of her 45-year experience of making shit up. That ended the palm reading. $10. Before leaving I asked if there was any way I could discern one's star sign from their palms. Nope. Damn. I could have made $125 a pop from the horoscopes I could write from the palms I apparently can read.
So, off I went to get good food with the rest of my money, and some ice cream from the Chinese peeps working at the candy shop. I could have spent that $10 on something more meaningful and worthwhile. Like candy.
I should probably avoid saying who this psychic is, but I will say that according to her information card leaflet thing, she's been using her "God given gift to help people through meditation and spiritual guidance" for over 45 years, and offers to "help you or a loved one in matters of love, business, divorce, depression, finding your life path or reuniting with a soulmate." Sweet. Oh wait, that's bad. It's a really bad idea to get personal advice from anyone other than a certified expert or a close friend.
But maybe I presume too much. After all she's been doing this for 45 years, which means she's either an expert in tapping into the fabric of the universe or she's pulling off the longest con I've ever taken note of. The decor of her boardwalk-side office no longer includes the smoke fountain I mentioned in the last post, but it does have religious icons from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and just tokens of astrology bullshit. I didn't find out anything about my horoscope, or my zodiac sign, which is a month off anyway.
I only got one palm reading, as this particular psychic's services are rather expensive. Palm readings are $10 each palm. Playing card readings are $25. Tarot card readings are $35 for a half deck and $45 for a full deck. Crystal readings are $75. And life charts are a whopping $125. Jesus fish! No wonder there are plaques adorning her walls commemorating her business achievements. She gets the big bucks single-handed for giving no real services whatsoever. I love how the "crystal reading" is such a big deal, even though you're essentially looking intently at a big piece of naturally occurring glass. Why are crystals hyped up to such a lofty position in the New Age movement? There's no significant properties in them. Now I could afford either a palm reading and a playing card reading, a half deck tarot card reading, or I could just get the palm reading and get something to eat. And since I don't support this establishment in any way whatsoever, it would be better to save as much money on this inanity as possible.
After waiting for a short while, I was at last able to see the psychic herself. This was the first time I'd actually laid eyes on her despite seeing her office for years, since she keeps herself hidden from passerby in a separate room. A clever marketing ploy, much like Cloverfield. She was a middle-aged Hispanic woman. Spoilers. She proceeded to do the palm reading. I have no idea how this is supposed to work. She's looking at the folds in my hand and somehow divines future meaning in them. Is there some genetic disposition that leads to certain aspects of my life that also leads to certain creases in my hands? Do events in the future bend the fabric of time to make these folds in my hands appear? What exactly is going on here? It can't just be a guessing game, can it? No, it's more like a guessing game and cold reading. John Edward would be proud.
And so, the reading. First, she pointed out my lifeline. Apparently I can ask the audience. Actually what she pointed out was that I will live to be 80 years old. I'd make a joke about testing that out by trying to do myself in right away, but it's more appropriate to point out that anyone taking this proclamation seriously would take it to mean they're invulnerable to life-threatening harm until they reach that age.
Interestingly she said I could read other people's palms. Really? Is this a secret ability? Do I have to go to a university or get some special training to understand it? Or am I only able to do it intuitively? How come I'm able to do it and not others? Did God decide I should be given this ability? Or do I have a high midichlorian count that lets me communicate with the Force? Hell, maybe I should do my own palm readings. Save myself ten bucks.
She said I have the ability to see spirits. Fuck, why don't I just become a paranormal investigator or some real life equivalent of Edward Carnby? Well, other than possibly my dead cat (which I'm pretty sure was actually just a step ladder I didn't get a good look at), I haven't seen any spirits. Maybe I just need to believe. I mean, the sign to the entrance did say that the psychic "has the right to not do readings for anyone she does not feel positive with." That's fine, it's her business, she can choose who she works with. But what exactly does it mean to be "positive"? Hell, I was a skeptic and an atheist going in and coming out of that place. Surely she could sense the negative energies.
She said I would be living in Pennsylvania, then asked where I come from. Why bother asking me? She should know, she's a goddamn psychic. I said New Jersey, and she confirmed her previous statement that I would be living in Pennsylvania, or Delaware. First of all, that's a really easy guess. I come from New Jersey, so sooner or later I'm going to spend some time in Pennsylvania. But why in the hell did her mind take a detour to Delaware for a second? That's another state away. Why would she second-guess where my future home would be?
She said I had marks of writing in my fingertips. Signs that I've been writing, with my hands? Noooo! Evidently I'm supposed to write inspirational stuff. Well that would be nice, but so far I just write random shit on my blog making fun of irrational belief systems and reviewing entertainment and just anything that comes into my head. At least I still occasionally get messages from people on YouTube saying they were inspired by comments I wrote on a George Carlin video. Comments I wrote a year or so back. Some people have way too much time on their hands.
She said I had "a positive loveline". ... What the hell is that supposed to mean? That I can fall in love? That it's within my human capacity? That's great, she informed me that I'm not a heartless sociopath. What are the odds? She continued that I "just need to open up a bit more". I can see why she has such a shining record as someone who gives relationship advice. I paid $10 for that little nugget. She couldn't have sensed that I'm, you know, ever so mildly autistic. I know you can't tell that right away from talking to me, but that's my point. If she had any special advice to offer, I wouldn't have to tell her that I'm an aspie. Otherwise she's little more than an unqualified counselor.
She even asked me if I was in a relationship, and when I said not as of yet, she said I could expect a love interest this August or September, if I "opened up" of course. I'm a single college student, and a virgin. Obviously I'm looking forward to going back, and hoping for the best when it comes to closer relationships. So naturally the response to such a visitor is wishing them luck in finding love soon, but this is supposed to be more than just well-wishing. It's supposed to be actual love advice. And it's so bland and predictable, and easily falsifiable. Watch, nothing's going to happen that quickly. It would have been something if she said I was actually going to have to wait until February or something to meet the right person. Or hell, maybe a year or two. But we wouldn't want to be realistic, would we? No, we need to feed people's desires as we drain their cash.
Continuing to draw out my path in life, she said I should look into engineering. I said I had never done anything related to it, and she predictably told me to open up to it. I'm sure my own ambitions or the advice of my academic counselors pale in comparison to the wisdom this woman has offered as a result of her 45-year experience of making shit up. That ended the palm reading. $10. Before leaving I asked if there was any way I could discern one's star sign from their palms. Nope. Damn. I could have made $125 a pop from the horoscopes I could write from the palms I apparently can read.
So, off I went to get good food with the rest of my money, and some ice cream from the Chinese peeps working at the candy shop. I could have spent that $10 on something more meaningful and worthwhile. Like candy.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Two ideas before college.
Well, technically three. We're still on for this Sunday's Doodlemastery Bible School, so stay tuned this weekend as we resume reading from Genesis. It should clear up some of the issues we had in the first chapter, don't you think?
As for the other two ideas, there's still the psychic. I've always wanted to see what kind of inane advice I'd get from there. I remember at one point the decor of the boardwalk-side office included a smoke fountain, that's a dish on a podium with dry ice smoking out of it. That right there sold me. At first I thought it was nonsensical mystic bullshit that was on par with the lesser sideshows, but once I saw the smoke fountain, I knew I had to take this stuff seriously. She's on the freakin' boardwalk, do I have any reason to believe she's giving anyone any meaningful advice? It is essentially just something people down here would do for fun, however there are incidents you'd hear about every now and then of some unfortunate sap relying on a psychic's advice for important matters, like relationships or finance decisions. Just talk to a friend if you can't afford any professional advice.
The last idea is that special dvd I've been saving. Maybe just a brief review won't hurt. I'll give you an idea of its contents: it is undoubtedly the worst anime/giant monster series I've ever seen. I remember the worst full-blooded anime I've ever seen, but I don't recall the title and quite frankly do not wish to endure the same pain again. That particular movie informed me that little gnomes live in our bloodstream where they make cotton candy. Yeah... But the one we're talking about has dinosaurs! And battle trucks! And strange, abusive sibling relationships! And sloths! Well, one sloth anyway.
Hopefully I'll have one of those things to write about by tomorrow.
As for the other two ideas, there's still the psychic. I've always wanted to see what kind of inane advice I'd get from there. I remember at one point the decor of the boardwalk-side office included a smoke fountain, that's a dish on a podium with dry ice smoking out of it. That right there sold me. At first I thought it was nonsensical mystic bullshit that was on par with the lesser sideshows, but once I saw the smoke fountain, I knew I had to take this stuff seriously. She's on the freakin' boardwalk, do I have any reason to believe she's giving anyone any meaningful advice? It is essentially just something people down here would do for fun, however there are incidents you'd hear about every now and then of some unfortunate sap relying on a psychic's advice for important matters, like relationships or finance decisions. Just talk to a friend if you can't afford any professional advice.
The last idea is that special dvd I've been saving. Maybe just a brief review won't hurt. I'll give you an idea of its contents: it is undoubtedly the worst anime/giant monster series I've ever seen. I remember the worst full-blooded anime I've ever seen, but I don't recall the title and quite frankly do not wish to endure the same pain again. That particular movie informed me that little gnomes live in our bloodstream where they make cotton candy. Yeah... But the one we're talking about has dinosaurs! And battle trucks! And strange, abusive sibling relationships! And sloths! Well, one sloth anyway.
Hopefully I'll have one of those things to write about by tomorrow.
Random thoughts.
I can't think of much else to write about since I'm still stuck at home. Stupid feral cats. Even personal matters are kind of dim in my mind, so I'll have to think it over. The next Bible review is a weekend away, I still haven't gotten an email from the college about getting a job there, and nothing else has really stirred my brains. There is one dvd I'm thinking of reviewing, but maybe I should keep it for a special occasion for friends in person. And I still haven't gone to the psychic's place for the novelty of seeing that kind of idiocy firsthand. So until something more interesting happens, here are some random thoughts of mine:
Why are ghosts always depicted as having clothes? I thought only people or living things were supposed to have souls. So shouldn't all ghosts be naked? It might be an indication that visions of ghosts depend entirely on what people expect to see. Or maybe only puritans care to come back to the land of the living.
How come no psychic has used their abilities to win the lottery? The "abuse of power" argument doesn't work since it's clear psychics have no problem with being greedy, and even if they weren't there are a lot of charities that could use that money. And why the hell would they keep any kind of special knowledge to themselves? Any kind of understanding of the paranormal could make for leaps and bounds in advancing the cause for humanity.
Are taxes good or bad? I've seen two separate articles published by the New York Post, both about Hillary Clinton. One says that she and Obama are going to destroy small businesses by raising the upper-class tax (to a more reasonable level, because it's seriously putting the rest of us - 90% of the population - at a seriously unfair disadvantage). Disregarding the fact that small businesses are not paid for out of one's pocket (and if they are then said person is not financially impaired in the first place), there was another article soon thereafter which claimed that Clinton had betrayed New York State by slashing the taxes for foreign dignitaries. But then by free market logic wouldn't that increase the amount of business taking place and make up for the tax cuts with a little extra? Not that I know anything about economics or that I'm not lazy enough to look any of this up, but I'd like some consistency in newspapers. Even in idiotic tabloids like the New York Post.
Seriously, what are symbolic days or years? I don't think anyone can adequately explain that.
How are zombies supposed to move around with no metabolism? They're obviously using some energy lumbering around feeding on the living, so they must be burning calories. But if they have a metabolism, how are they considered undead? That would put them in the same category as "the infected", people whose minds and bodies are deteriorating. Not even Max Brooks explained that one.
Why do bodies in Fallout 3 fly through the air in a ludicrous fashion? Oh wait, awesomeness factor. Nevermind.
Would it be considered offensive to point out in a conversation concerning western medicine versus traditional that traditional remedies just don't work on any level comparable to modern medicine? I only ask because several of my friends are Chinese nationals. I don't know how much of it is an issue of nationalism. It's somewhat like telling an American that prayer just doesn't work. I don't intend to be rude about it or anything, but if anything like that or astrology ever come up then I'm not really sure how to say something like that to an otherwise friendly and reasonable person. I do know it was more awkward when a girl I was interested in believed in astrology. That should have killed my interest then and there, but then again I am an idiot.
Yu-Gi-Oh. Just the show itself. Really, wtf. Card games? That's going to decide the fate of the world? A children's card game? And the "heart of the cards" can suck it. It's really sad that I know any of this in the first place.
Why does my family insist on quoting George Carlin only when particular bits reinforce their beliefs? Really, dad? Carlin? The same guy who was legendary for his awesome "Religion is bullshit" routine? Alright, if you want to go down that road. Let's take a look at some more Lewis Black while we're at it.
Does anyone else own a lightsaber? Ahhh I miss those duels. Even though the guys turned out to be jerks anyway. That's right. I'm too geeky for lightsaber duels and D&D roleplaying.
Why do we feel better leaving things up to chance only for certain things? Particularly for things revolving around birth. We won't fiddle around with DNA even if it means a better chance at avoiding genetic illnesses, and we won't give kids a fair chance when it comes to the environment they're raised in. No, we'd rather have our offspring done "all natural", which basically means setting the genetic mixer on high and letting God sort it out. Then we leave the kid to whatever destiny the parents have decided for them, about gender, about religion, about tradition, about freedom to change their mind about everything. I guess sooner or later we have to yield to a person's judgement, and just hope that person is especially caring for the next generation. Hasn't turned out too well so far, in my opinion.
Where do you get those hats, seriously? You know what I'm talking about. Those... hats! I know I'm not one for headgear, but damn there are some snappy hats out there. Where does one acquire those hats?
I'm all out of ideas, so I'm going to let this one go out as is. Hopefully next time I'll have something more interesting to talk about. Maybe it's time I finally payed "Madame Fatima" a visit.
"The deck! It senses my doubt!"
Why are ghosts always depicted as having clothes? I thought only people or living things were supposed to have souls. So shouldn't all ghosts be naked? It might be an indication that visions of ghosts depend entirely on what people expect to see. Or maybe only puritans care to come back to the land of the living.
How come no psychic has used their abilities to win the lottery? The "abuse of power" argument doesn't work since it's clear psychics have no problem with being greedy, and even if they weren't there are a lot of charities that could use that money. And why the hell would they keep any kind of special knowledge to themselves? Any kind of understanding of the paranormal could make for leaps and bounds in advancing the cause for humanity.
Are taxes good or bad? I've seen two separate articles published by the New York Post, both about Hillary Clinton. One says that she and Obama are going to destroy small businesses by raising the upper-class tax (to a more reasonable level, because it's seriously putting the rest of us - 90% of the population - at a seriously unfair disadvantage). Disregarding the fact that small businesses are not paid for out of one's pocket (and if they are then said person is not financially impaired in the first place), there was another article soon thereafter which claimed that Clinton had betrayed New York State by slashing the taxes for foreign dignitaries. But then by free market logic wouldn't that increase the amount of business taking place and make up for the tax cuts with a little extra? Not that I know anything about economics or that I'm not lazy enough to look any of this up, but I'd like some consistency in newspapers. Even in idiotic tabloids like the New York Post.
Seriously, what are symbolic days or years? I don't think anyone can adequately explain that.
How are zombies supposed to move around with no metabolism? They're obviously using some energy lumbering around feeding on the living, so they must be burning calories. But if they have a metabolism, how are they considered undead? That would put them in the same category as "the infected", people whose minds and bodies are deteriorating. Not even Max Brooks explained that one.
Why do bodies in Fallout 3 fly through the air in a ludicrous fashion? Oh wait, awesomeness factor. Nevermind.
Would it be considered offensive to point out in a conversation concerning western medicine versus traditional that traditional remedies just don't work on any level comparable to modern medicine? I only ask because several of my friends are Chinese nationals. I don't know how much of it is an issue of nationalism. It's somewhat like telling an American that prayer just doesn't work. I don't intend to be rude about it or anything, but if anything like that or astrology ever come up then I'm not really sure how to say something like that to an otherwise friendly and reasonable person. I do know it was more awkward when a girl I was interested in believed in astrology. That should have killed my interest then and there, but then again I am an idiot.
Yu-Gi-Oh. Just the show itself. Really, wtf. Card games? That's going to decide the fate of the world? A children's card game? And the "heart of the cards" can suck it. It's really sad that I know any of this in the first place.
Why does my family insist on quoting George Carlin only when particular bits reinforce their beliefs? Really, dad? Carlin? The same guy who was legendary for his awesome "Religion is bullshit" routine? Alright, if you want to go down that road. Let's take a look at some more Lewis Black while we're at it.
Does anyone else own a lightsaber? Ahhh I miss those duels. Even though the guys turned out to be jerks anyway. That's right. I'm too geeky for lightsaber duels and D&D roleplaying.
Why do we feel better leaving things up to chance only for certain things? Particularly for things revolving around birth. We won't fiddle around with DNA even if it means a better chance at avoiding genetic illnesses, and we won't give kids a fair chance when it comes to the environment they're raised in. No, we'd rather have our offspring done "all natural", which basically means setting the genetic mixer on high and letting God sort it out. Then we leave the kid to whatever destiny the parents have decided for them, about gender, about religion, about tradition, about freedom to change their mind about everything. I guess sooner or later we have to yield to a person's judgement, and just hope that person is especially caring for the next generation. Hasn't turned out too well so far, in my opinion.
Where do you get those hats, seriously? You know what I'm talking about. Those... hats! I know I'm not one for headgear, but damn there are some snappy hats out there. Where does one acquire those hats?
I'm all out of ideas, so I'm going to let this one go out as is. Hopefully next time I'll have something more interesting to talk about. Maybe it's time I finally payed "Madame Fatima" a visit.
"The deck! It senses my doubt!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
