Joshua Roberts

bertrand russell and thomas paine referenced in the opening remarks in the same breath

you dont need to worry about the probability of metaphysics having substance, or gods wroth

ill kill you myself

bertrand russell equated to thomas paine

when you realize you are dealing with someone who has zero intellectual conscience and so little respect for the work of science, that such a gross incongruity escapes him effortlessly, it all becomes funny

it all becomes just the latest travail in a long line of clucking for the animal that invented knowledge

“none are so enchained as those who mistakenly think themselves free” –goethe
and then ultimately

the reason none of this holds any value to me, one way Or the other

is that the question itself isnt really that interesting

you have an inherently super-complex world with multiple dimensions that looks more and more like some kind of holographic fractal where perception conditions existence and on the other hand you have very real, historical and logistical substance of otherwise useless praxis

good people cannot sit on either seat
yes, i put my chair in the middle: deliberately.

to the metaphysicians i say: te ignosce

and to the bad scientists i come with a whip and scorn them in the name of scientific conscience and circumspection

and i will say to both what Sgt. Ermey did in full metal jacket, “to me, you are all equally worthless.”
chris still has my respect for one reason alone

IN VINO VERITAS

right old boy?

RIGHT!?

alas, all the esoteric magick in the world wont save the rich men and all the wisdom on earth wont save the plebs – selah
The Religion vs Science sideshow is part of the NWO plan to destroy all religion incidentally

i am oda nobunaga
i am also liu bei
thermonuclear, my saga
of the harmonizing way -
it breaks out from every confine
bursting bottles like a new wine
till the arms of his foes supine
are laid down within the day

what do you think NORTHCOM is for dude? why do you think the police has been federalized and turned into an army? look at the baseline statistics on war expense, we are a NWO hijacked nation and have been used as the NWOs pitbull for almost a century… the rise of PMCs and groups like Blackwater et al. should really drive home the point in the baseline figures on war expense – but of course this is like the business world, endless front companies, holding groups and subsidiaries – endless derivative financial instruments etc. – the plebs are being used as a political football and an excuse for more police state, genuine dissent is being channeled into dead ends so that it cannot produce political momentum or, if it does produce political momentum, that force vector can be roped in and aligned for vertical integration within one or the other polarity of the false political paradigm – a paradigm engineered for precisely this effect and reinforced by a corporate media. system, a hijacked fourth estate, where even the so-called alternative media is merely a subsidiary of Halliburton.

the rituals inversion will give birth to a new type of man

already he exists in a larval state

already the species has begun to open its eyes

i shall turn this spectacle of evil into a ceremony of light with one movement of my hand

(on a side note i do not fully support or endorse this youtube user or their views, nevertheless, parallel interests)

The Coming Economic Implosion Is a Set-Up! – YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMTdXBA3i28

aaron is brilliant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SrgM5B_b9Q

Brazen, Open Tyranny

Over expression of the “bmat-2 gene”

this is SOMA folks – the end results are inevitably more widespread like robbing the individual of their humanity

freedom is the freedom to fail and i am actually quite incensed by the idea of wiping out such a drive in the human being

the end result is SOMA, an inability to understand the full spectrum ramifications of something like this is Fatal not just for the individual but for the species

the relentless drive to put man in a box, to make people useful and in short, to “perfect” the world has resulted in constant error – and yet here we are tampering with the very basics, the very fundamentals the biochemical/genetic building blocks — even though we do not really understand the blueprint!!!!

it is madness

this is absolute madness and yet i would not want to engineer a vaccine

folks they are working on a vaccine for having a conscience – the implications are earth shattering

you think shit is fucked up now? you think religion is the problem?

if so – you have no fucking idea what kind of thx-1138 world of psychopaths and robots this entire line of reasoning ultimately will inevitably devolve on.

LETS SHUT DOWN THE HUMAN ABILITY FOR BELIEF AND DESIRE?

THIS MAN SHOULD BE EXECUTED FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

-joshua roberts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVqocmKGfFc

this was a triumph
im making a note here:
HUGE SUCCESS

the juxtaposition of this imagery could not be a more eloquent lens through which to observe the modern age and it is a microcosm of the entire phenomenology of Modernism as such.

im not even religious folks, i just appreciate intelligence

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viQl-p5oyHM

do not play into the hands of the NWO by allowing the human species to be divided over minutiae

Atheists Don’t Believe in God

I can neither prove nor refute the existence of deity, as a quantum dualist I must assume that the unified field of energy underlying existence may in fact have a type of consciousness most akin to the taoist concept of “the way” or perhaps o the transcendentalist notion of the “over soul”. Is that deity? I cannot say, to be honest its not really a subject that interests me because i cant prove much about it so why even bother myself with it. thats what gets me about religious people, they all seem to think they can know the mind of god etc, ludicrous. if there were a god or gods how could anyone know what they think and if so why should anyone else belive them! The saddest thing is I am sure some religious person will come along and argue some insane inherency via a Kantian treatment. that is how silly people can be, they have a personal need for there to be a god and will go to any length to create a system which proves his existence.

In a fight against global corporatism and the dominance of an elite people of faith often are my natural allies, whats more I find that on the whole they are also decent people, perhaps even more so than my atheistic friends. But to be perfectly honest its about a horse a piece, neither group has an exclusive claim to be more ethical or humane.

I think it is important to tolerate both because one cannot prove or disprove the point of contention to within a reasonable degree of probability.

When it comes to the theoretical application of a process, or the perspective of that process as accounting for variation etc, again it is important to go with which system is more probably true based on evidence and examination. Available evidence suggests that “evolution” (which is a very complex concept and should not be mistakenly considered to be a codified set of principles in any sense although clearly one could make a list) is the most reasonable explanation for a range of aspects in cell biology. Although we may not understand this process completely, and we may never truly understand it thus not ruling out the hand of some unknown and unknowable god (for instance we might say that our thoughts have some influence on the process or our feelings this would hold with a qm view and yet seem metaphysical enough to insight notions of the divine), we can safely understand the process from the perspective analysis justifies.

The real danger here is interpretation and attitude. As with all science, it is a question of how you use it, it is a tool and one can wield a tool for humane and beneficial purposes or for brutal and inefficient ones.

Evolutionary theory was used to underwrite a gilded age philosophy of might makes right, it has been used again and again by some to underwrite their own arrogance and sense of entitlement to brutalize and dominate others. While we might never wish to dismiss the concept of a theory of rank, we must come to understand that absolute necessity of the whole, we can never make the mistake of thinking we know more than we do! Often one becomes arrogant because they think they understand a complex system well enough to safely make decisions, this is utter folly, one can never understand any system this well and must always make a decision with caution and a circumspection informed by tolerance.

History is full of examples where sweeping decisions were made about systems and the result was that those decisions broke the system because they overlooked or neglected what was vital, sweeping it away out of ignorance as to the integral nature of the system and the role each integer played!

Who knows, perhaps we atheists should learn something here, perhaps as a species we even Need this idea of god now more than ever. If not for ourselves than for others, though it bears incredible risks, it may still serve some vital purpose! Of course my instinct is not friendly to that view, I see religion as a source of manipulation and some of histories greatest atrocities.

Do People Become Atheists so They Can Act Immorally?

There are probably some people who do, but largely no, in fact most atheists start out religious because that’s how they were indoctrinated and gradually come to openly oppose religion after conducting analysis. In my own life I have spent nearly a decade making a comparative study of world religions, from the Elder Eddas to the Eleusinian Mysteries, I love the perspective of religion as astro-theology when it comes to judeo-christianity but the same thing applies to many other systems. Many of the earliest metaphysical systems that we might call pagan religions are closer almost to a quantum view of nature, in that they posit that there are “gods in all things” etc.

The problem here is that without morality one must stand on ethics, which is sufficient, but requires Other People to hold a person to a standard. Deity is more effective because it uses the Threat of repercussions after death (about which we have no experience and therefore it is terrifying) or within this own life via an omnipotent and omnipresent mind. We mustn’t forget however that morality is a perspective informed by a set of values which are human, they are not divine, and they are codified by humans. Thus the two approaches are identical! It is just that with the moralistic one there is an injected fear of divine reprisal to sweeten the pot and keep people from doing ill to one another or acting unjustly. But isn’t this also the source of a greater volatility within the morality system? All too often we have evidence of god being used as the justification for bloodshed!

I prefer ethics, without a concept of the divine, governed by a culture (which, as plato reminds us, is a difficult thing to produce and should be our primary concern) a culture which rigorously pursues the concept of justice.