nemesis wrote:
> the Jewish people believe the Kingdom of God is right here, on Earth. No 
> reincarnation involved, just the dead being given their previous bodies 
> back at Judgement Day and Earth turning back to its divine garden state.

Brigham Young once said something to the effect of, "If we are ever to 
live in a kingdom paved with gold, it will be because we have mined the 
the gold, formed bricks of it, and laid it in the streets ourselves."

Whether or not you subscribe to it, I like the Mormon idea that the 
paradise is paradise because we work to take care of it*, and not 
because some nebulous God waved his hands and said so.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

*Yes, I know there's a lot more to it than that, but you get the point...

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:
> However it is also true to say that we evolved within a particularly 
> stable ecosystem.

Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.

Which ecosystem is that? Arctic? Africa? Polynesian islands? Europe? 
South America?

Many of the disparities between human societies came about exactly 
because of the differences in ecosystems. Europe had metal ore near the 
surface and the eurasian continent was broadly east-west, so Europe got 
a big jump over Africa when humans moved there.  (The latter allowed 
people to take domesticated animals and plants with them when they 
moved, since it was in the same temperate zone.)

People have colonized everyplace in the world, wiped out most big 
dangerous animals they came across (again, outside of Africa), and lived 
through both heat waves and ice ages.  It's been far from stable.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:
> Ethics is way overrated. Nobody would act ethically (not the least because
> there's no such thing as universal ethics) if it weren't enforced.

On the contrary, acting ethically is acting on a certain conviction, 
whether or not you could be caught.  The only enforcement that comes 
into play is self enforcement.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> the Jewish people believe the Kingdom of God is right here, on Earth. No 
> reincarnation involved, just the dead being given their previous bodies 
> back at Judgement Day and Earth turning back to its divine garden state.

God can damn well fix anything we mess up, then, if he's gonna be doing 
that s__t.  ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > the Jewish people believe the Kingdom of God is right here, on Earth. No
> > reincarnation involved, just the dead being given their previous bodies
> > back at Judgement Day and Earth turning back to its divine garden state.
>
> God can damn well fix anything we mess up, then, if he's gonna be doing
> that s__t.  ;-)

of course God will be sending sinners to Venus. ;)

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> the Jewish people believe the Kingdom of God is right here, on Earth. No
>>> reincarnation involved, just the dead being given their previous bodies
>>> back at Judgement Day and Earth turning back to its divine garden state.
>> God can damn well fix anything we mess up, then, if he's gonna be doing
>> that s__t.  ;-)
> 
> of course God will be sending sinners to Venus. ;)

Venus City? :) :) :)

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:11:33 EST, "gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

>
>That has got to be the most fascinating sociological idea I've run across this
>year: that a belief in reincarnation could lead to a basis for ethics, in a
>sort of self-interest for one's lot the next time around.  I'm neither calling
>you crazy nor say I concur completely, it's just a new idea in my head.
>

Maybe you should get out more :) After all Buddhism is one of the world's major
religions. Not that I am religious my self. I just think it is good manners. 

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:03:18 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>  
did spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>> However it is also true to say that we evolved within a particularly  
>> stable ecosystem.
>
> Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.
>
> Which ecosystem is that? Arctic? Africa? Polynesian islands? Europe?  
> South America?
>
> Many of the disparities between human societies came about exactly  
> because of the differences in ecosystems. Europe had metal ore near the  
> surface and the eurasian continent was broadly east-west, so Europe got  
> a big jump over Africa when humans moved there.  (The latter allowed  
> people to take domesticated animals and plants with them when they  
> moved, since it was in the same temperate zone.)
>
> People have colonized everyplace in the world, wiped out most big  
> dangerous animals they came across (again, outside of Africa), and lived  
> through both heat waves and ice ages.  It's been far from stable.

Over the long term it has been stable it's only been recently (long-term)  
that we've been wiping out species and domesticating both fauna and flora  
and carrying them with us; and look at the consequences. Talk to some of  
the Australians here about the introduction of non-native species to their  
country, look at how vulnerable our crops are to disease due to their  
uniformity.

I'm not saying we can't, and haven't, adapted to short-term alterations  
what I'm saying is that logically our best chances of survival is to  
maintain a system that we know we can survive in.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
> But there were volcanoes, the natural decay of vegetation, the
> weathering of carbonate rock, and other natural processes.  Those
> processes exist today, as well.  And that's just for carbon dioxide.
>
> The number one greenhouse gas, more potent and existing in far greater
> quantities than anything we make, is water vapor.  Water vapor is
> responsible for the vast majority of the greenhouse effect.
>

Unless your intent was to deceive, you should also state the greenhouse forcing
of those relative components existing at percent vs. ppm levels.  (I guess your
actual intent was not to deceive, but that you trusted someone who trusted
someone who trusted someone whose actual intent was to deceive: there's a
problem in judgment somewhere in that chain).


As far as biofuels and CO2 emissions: Here's a shameless plug to my blog's
article on "Who was really in favor of biofuels?"

http://pterandon.blogspot.com/2008/02/who-was-really-in-favor-of-biofuels.html

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:11:33 EST, "gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>
> >
> >That has got to be the most fascinating sociological idea I've run across this
> >year: that a belief in reincarnation could lead to a basis for ethics, in a
> >sort of self-interest for one's lot the next time around.  I'm neither calling
> >you crazy nor say I concur completely, it's just a new idea in my head.
> >
>
> Maybe you should get out more :) After all Buddhism is one of the world's major
> religions. Not that I am religious my self. I just think it is good manners.
>
> Regards Stephen


Perhaps. I've only perceived Buddhism as having a world view steeped in
fatalism, passivity, and denial of the illusion of suffering around us.

I have not met many folks who say, "Because I'll be reincarnated, I better make
sure I clean up this place. "

Post a reply to this message