Based on the premise that thoughts are spirit not substance

[savagewind]

So food and shelter are bad things, but stuff to cover our naughty bits is okay.

Haha You must learn to consider further grasshopper. To learn to grow food the right way is excellent. There are many wonderful people who know how. But there are many who have turned a good thing into a very bad thing. Think forest burning. Think pesticides. Think the dust bowl. Think the potato famine.

Now shelter. Shelter is good. A person can prosper in a teepee and a teepee can do no harm. There are actually many people who have no shelter so I want to change my answer to most but not all people have benefited from architecture. Also please consider all those people who have died because buildings are being made too tall.

 

[painted wolf]

Greater good is the survival of Earth and earth's species.

Please THINK of how many people there are on Earth. Then CONSIDER how few are proficient in things like "sending rovers to the moon". Even the ones who can calculate such things as space travel, are the same who cannot agree at home on simple things.

I am talking about the fact that dumb matter agrees on everything. Human agreement is very very rare. Do you agree? NO you do not. My point.

Dumb matter doesn't agree on everything.

Extinction and global catastrophe on a massive scale exist without the input of humanity. The dinosaurs did not agree with the asteroid.

wa:do

 

[Thief]

Ok...maybe I overlooked it.....

Chemistry is much the same when we are alive.....as dead.

Of course a tissue sample under a microscope won't fool anyone.
Living tissue does change a little as it dies.....

Point is....
The body is what it is......as long as we are in it.....and spiritually involved.
A dead body is said to have no spirit.
The spirit has left the body.

If not then the entire package goes into the box....and then into the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.
It really is dark down there.

So is there really any confusion here?
you people do know the difference between the living and the dead.....right?

We are dust....one way or the other.

btw...this is not a religious idea.
I think it's just something obvious.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Charity is not a thing

Yes it clearly is.

and mass production is the father of plenitude which is definitely straining the Earth.

No it clearly isn't. The majority of mass production is sustainable - without it, most of the world would go hungry.

The other four are some of the "relatively few" things that have helped all mankind.

You're moving the goalposts. You said "most people on earth", not "all".

I am done arguing as I cannot stand people who say black and white can never be gray. I do not care that you do not know what grey is.

You seem to not be understanding a word I've said, then.

After I considered my answer I have decided to change it. It is my opinion that agriculture and architecture may have caused more harm than good so far over all.

Then you're obviously wrong.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Haha You must learn to consider further grasshopper. To learn to grow food the right way is excellent. There are many wonderful people who know how. But there are many who have turned a good thing into a very bad thing. Think forest burning.

What about it?

Think pesticides.

What's wrong with them?

Think the dust bowl.

The dust bowl was a natural event.

Think the potato famine.

Again, natural event.

Now shelter. Shelter is good. A person can prosper in a teepee and a teepee can do no harm. There are actually many people who have no shelter so I want to change my answer to most but not all people have benefited from architecture.

So you admit that I'm right, then, because you asked for things that benefited MOST not ALL people.

Also please consider all those people who have died because buildings are being made too tall.

Which is probably nowhere near the number of people who have died because of inadequate protection from nature (i.e malaria) and the elements.

 

[savagewind]

Dumb matter doesn't agree on everything.

Extinction and global catastrophe on a massive scale exist without the input of humanity. The dinosaurs did not agree with the asteroid.

wa:do

OK. It is true. We are talking about the cellular level. Atoms agreeing with atoms. The bonds within all living organisms are agreeing with each other. If they were not "agreeing" with what they are bonding the bonded things would part. Is that the case?

 

[savagewind]

Ok...maybe I overlooked it.....

Chemistry is much the same when we are alive.....as dead.

Of course a tissue sample under a microscope won't fool anyone.
Living tissue does change a little as it dies.....

Point is....
The body is what it is......as long as we are in it.....and spiritually involved.
A dead body is said to have no spirit.
The spirit has left the body.

If not then the entire package goes into the box....and then into the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.
It really is dark down there.

So is there really any confusion here?
you people do know the difference between the living and the dead.....right?

We are dust....one way or the other.

btw...this is not a religious idea.
I think it's just something obvious.

It is obvious.

 

[savagewind]

What about it?

[forest burning] It is the least effective way to farm land. Is it not the lazy man's way? For one thing it is wasteful. For another thing it pollutes the air.

What's wrong with them?

[pesticides] I am sure I cannot give you an accurate scientific answer so why not go ask the government why they have outlawed certain ones and research "Organic Gardening" to find out why people would choose a MUCH harder way to grow crops.

The dust bowl was a natural event.

I do not know. I have heard it was exacerbated by over farming and bad farming techniques. I might be wrong but I'm sticking with the opinion it was not all nature's fault.

Again, natural event.

[potato famine] I think this also was caused by bad farming techniques. The blight of course was all nature. The fact that many people starved to death was because of bad planning as they grew only one kind of crop and even (I have heard) one similar genetically disposed potato. The deaths could have been prevented as I understand it.

So you admit that I'm right

What do you wish to be right about? Maybe I can accommodate you.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

[pesticides] I am sure I cannot give you an accurate scientific answer so why not go ask the government why they have outlawed certain ones and research "Organic Gardening" to find out why people would choose a MUCH harder way to grow crops.

Because people in general don't understand how organic farming can, in some cases, be more harmful to ecosystems than pesticides, and governments are quick to react without sufficient research in the face of public opinion.

[potato famine] I think this also was caused by bad farming techniques. The blight of course was all nature. The fact that many people starved to death was because of bad planning as they grew only one kind of crop and even (I have heard) one similar genetically disposed potato. The deaths could have been prevented as I understand it.

I'm going to ignore the implication of the thousands of deaths from the potato famine somehow being their own fault, and instead ask how you can paint "bad farming techniques" as a consequence of agriculture. That's like blaming the collapse of a badly constructed building on the process of construction itself. It's advanced methods developed in these processes which SAVE lives, and lives are lost when people make mistakes or don't have that level of understanding. You don't blame all of medicine for an epidemic, and you don't blame agriculture for a famine.

What do you wish to be right about? Maybe I can accommodate you.

You said that most people have benefited from architecture, which was exactly my point to begin with.

 

[painted wolf]

OK. It is true. We are talking about the cellular level. Atoms agreeing with atoms. The bonds within all living organisms are agreeing with each other. If they were not "agreeing" with what they are bonding the bonded things would part. Is that the case?

Nope... even that breaks down all the time.

Cancer, aging, numerous immunodeficiency illnesses... all cells working against one another or even against themselves.

Atoms themselves decay over time...

Nothing is ever in perfect harmony.

wa:do

 

[savagewind]

Nope... even that breaks down all the time.

Cancer, aging, numerous immunodeficiency illnesses... all cells working against one another or even against themselves.

Atoms themselves decay over time...

Nothing is ever in perfect harmony.

wa:do

Yes. Thank you. When someone says something happens why do other people jump in and say it doesn't always happen? It is like the people say if it doesn't always happen then you cannot prove it happens.

I am talking about what might be called "design" but design needs a designer. People who say there is no intelligence (God) behind what is called life. I am talking about the apparent "smartness" of dumb physical substance. The two sides of a bond many many times over in one small organism need to "agree" that they belong together. OK? Dumb bits of physical matter can "agree" to stick together (until they don't ). BUT PEOPLE CANNOT DO THAT. Comprenday? Bits of matter smaller than the smallest particle ARE WAY WAY SMARTER THAN ANY HUMAN in my opinion.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Dumb bits of physical matter can "agree" to stick together (until they don't ). BUT PEOPLE CANNOT DO THAT. Comprenday?

Sounds like projection. Society is based on the concept of groups. People obviously stick together in daily life, agree on concepts, share experiences. What you are claiming minds cannot do is done all the time.

 

[savagewind]

Sounds like projection. Society is based on the concept of groups. People obviously stick together in daily life, agree on concepts, share experiences. What you are claiming minds cannot do is done all the time.

SIGH. So I am looking around for WORLD PEACE and I just seem to not see it. Please can you point me in the right direction? It's got to be around somewhere.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

SIGH. So I am looking around for WORLD PEACE and I just seem to not see it. Please can you point me in the right direction? It's got to be around somewhere.

World peace implies universal bonds I assume?

You're not going to find it, in matter or in mind. Matter does not universally bond. Bonds are between small groups, which then bond with other groups, each with varying strengths. Elements of some bonds will react harshly with others, even if they share bonds with a specific element.

Likewise with minds.

 

[savagewind]

All the cells in a living organism, most all the time, but not always, but enough to keep the organism alive and reasonably happy, get along peaceful and all do their job most of the time. There has not been one moment (bite me) in the history of the world that the same harmony has happen among people. People have intelligence and cannot do what unintelligent matter can.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

All the cells in a living organism, most all the time, but not always, but enough to keep the organism alive and reasonably happy, get along peaceful and all do their job most of the time. There has not been one moment (bite me) in the history of the world that the same harmony has happen among people. People have intelligence and cannot do what unintelligent matter can.

There have been no moments in the history of the world in which people came together to survive and flourish?

How blind are you to history then?

 

[savagewind]

There have been no moments in the history of the world in which people came together to survive and flourish?

How blind are you to history then?

Oh brother. Can you picture the world is like a house? All the people are in ONE house. Tell me, History major, when was it that all the people in the house got along in a bond of peace?

Yes, tribes have done it. All the people in the all the tribes have never done it. OK, maybe for a day. Tell me what years was it where there was no conflict History major?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Oh brother. Can you picture the world is like a house? All the people are in ONE house. Tell me, History major, when was it that all the people in the house got along in a bond of peace?

Yes, tribes have done it. All the people in the all the tribes have never done it. OK, maybe for a day. Tell me what years was it where there was no conflict History major?

You sound tense.

Can you tell me any given moment when there is absolutely no conflict within a human body? No dying cells, no pathogens, no mutations?

 

[savagewind]

World peace implies universal bonds I assume?

You're not going to find it, in matter or in mind. Matter does not universally bond. Bonds are between small groups, which then bond with other groups, each with varying strengths. Elements of some bonds will react harshly with others, even if they share bonds with a specific element.

Likewise with minds.

This is reasonable. Thanks for sharing. See how at the molecular level "small groups bond together, which then bond together some more". People cannot do that yet. I have a feeling they don't even care to try.

 

[savagewind]

You sound tense.

Can you tell me any given moment when there is absolutely no conflict within a human body? No dying cells, no pathogens, no mutations?

There is where you forget about gray. Poor poor gray.