tar

dimreeper, So you have hate under control. But how do you show your disapproval, and why do you disapprove of someone's actions if there is not a way you would rather they acted? Regards, TAR

they have been "attacking" our way of life, the rule of law, our sensibilities and our principles for 4 years after Paris they called on their followers to attack soft targets in the West, any where they could NATO agreements say you attack one member you attack the whole alliance. We are under attack. I love that you don't hate me. I question why you don't hate my enemies though.

you figure by hating me for hating them they will feel your love and get better? OK, so exactly why do you figure our Secretary of State does not go to Raqqa, sit down with the Caliph and sort this thing out?

I am thinking you are fighting contradictory enemies. You want to fight John Lennon's battle and make there be no religions. And you want to have me stand aside and renounce my Crusader ways and submit so that all the world will be for Allah. I have thought long and hard about a lot of things things since 9/11 and one thing I am sure of. It is OK to fight when you have enemies. There is no objective truth when it comes to love and hate. You are for those things that you include in your feeling of self, and you are against those things you push out from your feeling of self. well wait if my hatred does not affect them, how do you figure your tolerance affects them? You have been tolerant and loving from the get go, and the Shite are killing the Sunni and everybody killing US and we them, since. Regardless of your love.

need I remind you who the Great Satan is? what is their point? um, I think "their" point is that I am in error, and need to convert is that your point, as well?

to ISIS? They regularly have their finances attacked by me, their leadership, we blow up their stuff and kill their fighters. If I was to be tolerant toward them, I would allow them to whip women for wearing makeup, I would turn my back when they threw gays off of buildings, I would allow them to kidnap young women and use them as sex slaves, I would allow them to steal all the valuables in a town to pay their fighters, I would tolerate their justice and excuse their cutting off the heads of journalists, I would tolerate their cutting of the clitoris of a female to keep them from pleasure in sex, and I would say "well they are just being themselves" when they destroy art and culture and monuments from the past. How to you intend on having this situation resolve itself with tolerance? Just let the whole area of the middle east and north Africa become part of the Caliphate, and let the Great Satan be destroyed? Regards, TAR

tolerant of ISIS? Just saw a commentator talking about the redacted transcript from the killing say that there was nothing the shooter said that was homophobic and it was all about revenge for America bombing his people, and fighting for Allah. The commentator suggested the Administration, which billed the shooting as a hate crime was down playing the ideologic rhetoric and redacting it, as to not emphasize the fact that it does not appear to be a hate crime, and to not focus attention on the fact that we have bombed this guy's people.

OK, and you are immune? How?

dimreeper, OK then, what do you think I was asking in the OP? Who or what are you assuming I was showing hatred toward in the OP, who or what do you figure I was calling the hated and who or what do you figure I was hating? My whole consideration is that if I hate the killer in Orlando and you hate the killer in Orlando, why do people search for enemies to hate within the family, when it is so obvious that the enemy is coming from outside the family. I raised the question in the psychology section, because I sense that some of the things we hate, are things we wish to push under the rug within our own psyches. Things like the potential homosexual feelings in the killer himself. Things like guilt at dropping bombs on people's houses in the name of fighting hate. There is an ideological war that is going on in the world today. Many of them. Syria and Assad and the Russians and the Iranians and ISIL and the Caliph in Raqqa all "against" the moderate democratic secular minded "rebels" we as America, back to fight Assad and ISIS both. The other day the Russians dropped cluster bombs on the Rebels we support. I am just trying to figure out what the right thing to do about it, is. Declare war on Syria and Iran and Russia and the Islamic State? Establish a no fly zone and shoot down Russian Bombers? Where does our hatred of ISIS and Hatred of the human rights abuses of Assad, look like love? Regards, TAR and where does turning the other cheek and tolerating injustice and hatred turn into allowing yourself to be defeated

or a conservative loves another human

dimreeper, I can't back it up simply, because what I am backing up is your attitude, that I need to be more tolerant and less hateful. I don't know where you got this stance. That is your internal account balance that is being kept. Since you think I keep missing the point, and your point is that I need to be more tolerant and less hateful, backing up is in your court, since you need to tell me which of my actions and statements and stories, indicate to you, that I am intolerant and hateful. Regards, TAR so far all we have is that I am a 62 year old white maie WASP, that is married with two children, has served in the Army, has worked in corporate America for 30 or 40 years, lives in the suburbs and is on soc. security, was registered Democrat when in a Democrat area and is now registered Republican, is middle of the road on many issues, looking at various conflicts from the point of view of all players, and has a grudge, a big time grudge against the people and ideology that took down the world trade towers and flight 83 and the pentagon on 9/11. A strong believer in tolerance and understanding, reason and finding workable solutions to all problems. Where these things point out to you that I hate, women, hate blacks, hate gays, or hate anybody other than the enemy I am fighting, ISIS, Al Queda, and any other group or nation looking to kill Americans, and wheresomething points out to you that I need to be more tolerant, is something that you need to describe to me, and it has nothing to do with politics. If you have proof that conservatives are hateful and progressives are loving, then this proof is falsified as soon as a progressive hates a hater.

or to make it worse, add age discrimination and hatred of certain nationalities wrong to do, but be an old white male heterosexual anglo saxon protestant American and geez you have 7 strikes against you from the get go you are out twice and a third as soon as you get in the batter's box as far as being labeled a hater goes and that is before you say a word just based on you age, race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic background, religion and nationality

dimreeper, Notch it as a win, if you wish. You never addressed the OP, just started in on the hatred of the conservatives. Never noticing of course that you were showing distaste toward conservatives. Interesting to me that it is wrong to depreciate one because of their race, sex or religion, but be a white anglo saxon protestant male, and you are automatically a hater. So take your win. You don't want to talk about the psychology of hate. You want to disparage white male privledge, white male greed, white male hatred and bigotry and homophobia or whatever. You use me like a scapegoat. I don't want this thread to be about politics. I want it to be about hate and why we hate and what we are really doing when we hate. How we choose up sides internally and put people on this or that side of the room. Regards, TAR

I am now thinking of the place as a destination. Like people now a days would go to the mall. People might gather for exchange of goods, technology, fellowship, communing with the stars, burying the dead, visiting the pyramids so-to-speak, or going to the county fair, but the center point, the purpose of the place, the draw was food clothing and shelter. I read that some early man would build homes from mammoth bones and skulls. And people would eat animals, and people would make furs and shoes and tools from the sinews and bones and hide and coat of animals. The first level of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs is the fulfillment of physiological needs like breathing and food and water shelter and clothing and sleep. Only after meeting these does one look toward safety and security, and after that, love and belonging. The scientific community is focused on the place as a temple. Perhaps going right to the third level of love and belonging, belonging to the universe. And this might be right. Except in my thinking we are talking about folk still looking to satisfy the first level. If the place was constructed before farming, before cities and it was not for habitation, then its purpose would be more likely aligned to getting the basic needs of humans fulfilled. Not yet was man in a position to worry about the higher levels of self esteem and self actualization...although the reliefs would suggest that those levels were a component of the effort...but to go immediately to the top, with none of the lower needs fulfilled makes only a small amount of sense. You need a payoff on all levels. As a site, built to exhibit mastery over the herds, between the rivers, it makes complete sense...to me. Thread, Thinking about the pond and water and the water proof floor made me wonder if clay could have been plastered to the inside walls making sort of a cistern or man made water hole, that would catch rain water both for human consumption, and to attract animals. The animals visiting the water hole would be lost in the maze and could not escape easily once the hunters came up. Especially if they came from the side with the entrance/exit. With the right ropes and ladders or logs to get up to the tops of the Ts, even a single hunter could close the entrance door and hunt the cornered animal. Makes me think also of the bull ring and the matador. That sport may have come from a long ago hunting technique, such as what I am proposing might have been the purpose of Gobekli Tepe. Regards, TAR Thread, Additional thoughts. why the first temple? Why not the first court? The accused and accuser each on a central T and the jury around. Or a grudge match location, pitting the champion of each of two rival tribes against each other surrounded by their supporters, ending the war with one death rather than the slaughter of the whole tribe. Or a sporting site, like our stadiums where two regions could compete for victory, without death...' Or perhaps the first governmental meeting place where the leaders of the various tribes would circle around the king and queen, or what ever. Regards, TAR Or maybe a place to punish those who broke the laws of the group. Like a gallows or a whipping post. Perhaps the first example of "running the gauntlet" as an place where one was initiated into manhood. Or a place where your head was cut off, for what ever reason.

My wife, just today(yesterday) visited Decoy Pond in England where an arm of the pond was designed narrowing down to a point and covered in chicken wire to where the ducks could be driven (by specially trained dogs) into the trap and taken(harvested). Look on Google Earth just north of Boarstall England at 51degrees 49 minutes 48.61 seconds N 1degree 5 minutes 40.67 seconds W

disarray, Yes I had a thread on the two nows, and I have argued back on forth on the implications of relativity and whether or not a thing actually contracts in length or whether the effects are due to switching reference frames and carrying a time or position incorrectly from the one frame to the other. But the question is not too far off topic, because if we are talking about another universe, we have to decide upon whether we are talking about a universe we can ever sense and interact with, or whether we are talking about a place or time or dimension that must or should exist, regardless of our ability to ever sense it, interact with it, or verify its existence. The Andromeda attack thing is strange to me, because one jumps imaginarily to the other galaxy and claims a thing happening or not happening depending on a small difference in blue shift or red shift of the information about the event coming to Earth bound observers3.. When the fact is, in both the case of the person walking toward Andromeda or the person walking away, the launch of the /will not be seen here for a million years, or however far away the galaxy is to us, and the difference between seeing the launch in a million years plus one microsecond and a million years minus one microsecond is nothing to write home about. Besides once we see the launch, even if their ships travel at half the speed of light, they can not get here for another million years because when we see their launch they would only have gotten half way here. So earlier you asked if there were other intelligent creatures in the universe. Where and when they are, makes a difference to the answer. For instance if the existence of their civilization lasted 1000 years, and began 1000 years ago, in universal now time, and their planet is 1000 lyrs from here, when we look toward their planet we can see the start of their civilization, and if we look again in a thousand years we will see the end. However if their planet is 2000 lyrs from here, we will not see the start of the civilization for 2000 years, and the end of their civilization for 3000 years....so when do you figure they existed, do exist or will exist "at the same time" as us, to where we can say that there "is" other intelligent life in the universe? Regards, TAR

Robittybob1, well we might still go with the double purpose thing or an evolving purpose thing. Certain of the rings had taller center stones and later ones shorter. Perhaps the taller ones were to keep the stone throwers out of reach of leaping stag horns and later the deer were used up and there was more sheep and boar that didn't jump as high. And I have not studied the difference in the symbols and reliefs between the first and the second...and the last, but it is possible that the idea was improved on, and upgrades were installed and the older one buried, as to not have the animals run into an unmanned trap. The ones with the fancy symbols may have been later on, generations later, as fancy stuff was added, like the cat predator looking down on the prey. And since they had this nice communal tool, it could have certainly doubled as a burial rite location, and tripled as a calendar. Regards, TAR

disarray, Well yes I think you can assume a universal now, because it is required to explain future events. It is absolutely true and verifiable that the Sun is shining right now. We can verify it when we see the Sun shining in 8 minutes. Gets to be a bit longer wait as you go out, and that is where I claim you cannot in truth make the statement that the universe is currently expanding, because the only current now that can be applied to the whole universe is the universal now, that is currently 13.8 billion years old, and you don't have much current information to go on, except very locally. With in a couple light seconds though, I think it is OK to fudge those few seconds together and call the moment now. For you and me and every one else on Earth we get the verification right away. Within the see it, process it, respond to it, time frame. Like perhaps the time it takes to feel the bug on your foot and knock it away and see it scurry off. So the universal now is imaginary, but it is something you know has to be the case inorder to get the message later. Something within your two second window of "the moment" is understandable, because like you say there is a time lag between seeing and reacting and such. A tenth of a second is about the shortest time it takes to get your foot off the gas and onto the brake. You can't do it faster. It's reaction time. But your observers in the water could all raise their hand when they hear the horn and lower their hand when they hear it stop and you would see the lead edge of the sound coming (with maybe a tenth of a second reaction time built in) and see that it has stopped before you stop hearing it. And it would all be understandable because the two nows are within your moment, and we are used to adding and subtracting, predicting and remembering and timing our motions. Like throwing and catching a ball and putting your glove where the ball is going to be when it gets to you. Outside the moment the task to comprehend the two nows grows in complexity and doability. Like driving the Mars rover remotely, takes some thinking and strategy and preprogramming. So an absolute clock might not be doable, but if one could figure exactly how long it has been since the Big Bang, like 13.7495996888299488599994488883838992929299993994857563900129999485885888188299399939399299292938388384888882887765543 billion years, down to the precision of a plank unit (the time it takes a photon to travel a plank length), then it is that time everywhere, because the universe didn't ever move from where the universe is. and any motion one thing has in relation to another is the same motion the other thing has in relation to it. So on the whole the entire universe is exactly as old as any part of it. And any time dilation or length contraction due to mass or motion is just a local discrepancy that would average out at a larger scale. Like if you watched a pulsar and counted the pulses and your traveling twin did the same, when she returned from the near light speed trip, your counts would have to be the same, because neither one of you ever took your eye off the pulsar. She might have counted more as she got closer to it and fewer as she traveled away from it on the way back, but once you are back together the count has to be the same. Regards, TAR So I am not convinced that one cannot assume that another part of the universe is not exactly as old as this part...did I say that right...too many negatives...

Sure I would call the police if I saw a crime being committed (if not stop the crime if I could.) I once commented on my boss having two glasses of wine at lunch and not my intention, but soon he was relieved of the post. But if you are seeing a business operating unfairly you should report it to the BBB or if you are seeing stock fraud or insider trading report it to the SEC, or if you see a crime in the works report it to the police or FBI. We already are watching each other, and expecting ethical behavior. If however you just think somebody is getting paid too much, work your way on to the board of directors and reduce their pay. What you call hoarding I call saving, or capital accumulation. You can't build any big projects without floating a bond. If there is nobody with stored value there would be nobody to loan money for you to buy your home, or car, or borrow money for your kid's college or for your town to put a new roof on the school. Bottom line, if you see a crime being committed, report it to the authorities. Don't wait for me. Regards, TAR Were you aware that the shareholders elect the board of directors, to look out for their interests? Were you aware that a large portion of our working population owns stocks and bond either directly or through their 401Ks or pension funds? In other words, the greedy corporations are being greedy on your behalf, since you are one of the owners. Companies were not formed to take care of the workers. The workers are supposed to take care of the company, and get paid for their efforts. same idea was expressed by JFK Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.

Now that I am 62 I am not as valuable a hire. I am slower, dimmer, less energetic and less fun than I used to be and a little emotional. I yield to younger more needy folk who have to earn a living to start a family and build a home. Employers would rather hire a 24 year old, that will work 24 hours a day for 24K, than hire a 62 year old that needs a nap after lunch, and could get the 24K or close to it, by just retiring.

I obviously needed the company to be there to have an interview and prove I would be a valuable hire. After I got laid off several years back, I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to arrange my life to offer people some good or service of value for which they would pay me. It is not easy. Corporations have figured a way, and need folks to carry out their plan, sell and support their goods and services. Their shareholders are the ones for whom I was working. The shareholders gave me the opportunity. Odd that you would have me remember how important the owners were to my survival, and how quickly Phi demonizes the same folk that gave me my livelihood

besides I already don't like the idea of being taken care of, and not being the one taking care of the place already, after I quit my job and did not find another I feel less of a man, less like I am doing my part I lost some identity when I was no longer an employee of a company I worked for for 30 years. When I run out of savings, and my pension and soc security does not pay passage then indeed I will be an object of your pity and might require a helping hand. I expect you will, at that point extend yours. but which one worked? the 60 an hour place or the 30 an hour place?

Let's imagine two restaurants, same food, same quality, same nice tables and decorations, same service, same handsome waiters, except A pays workers 30 dollars an hour and gives full health care benefits, family leave, and needs to charge 60 dollars for a meal to pay the rent, buy the food, and pay the workers to break even . B pays workers 15 an hour, only contributes legal minimum to health care costs, and can pay the rent, buy the food, pay the workers and break even charging 30 dollars a meal. Which restaurant goes out of business first? Which workers will be better off when the other place goes out of business? dimreeper, Well I have come here for validation. I think that is, to the thread topic, an important consideration. We, I am convinced, look to each other for validation. Look for the pat on the back, look to act and think and talk in the manner that will engender praise and confidence and support and love. Look for a team and look to be a good team member. Follow the rules, get strong and fast, run down the field and win for the team, or block and tackle to the point where your team scores more than the other team. As an American I take the heat for stuff America takes the heat for, and expect validation from my countrymen for following the rules, making the place work, looking out for my brother and living the American dream. Yet I just get Phi's pity and your tolerance. What is it that I am exhibiting that you so strongly want out of your being? Regards, TAR

Trump made an interesting observation and made a comment about it, he used the size of his rallies, usually during the day, to suggest that the people were there because they did not have jobs. I don't have a job. Full time jobs are fewer since Obama care forced employers over a certain number of employees to pay some of the insurance for workers that worked over 37 and half hours in a week. Result, more people worked less than 37 and a half hours in a week, or became consultants, or contract employees for a project, or any number of other ways to avoid the expense of covering people's health care. It is a dream to think that one can just make it a law to pay all workers 15 dollars an hour and then everybody will be out of poverty. It will not work, for 2 reasons. One, jobs not worth 15 dollars an hour can not pay 15 dollars an hour. The places will find ways to do with less employees, more automation, or simply close their doors and invest in an endeavor that will make money. The other reason it won't work is that if everybody is making 15 dollars for adding value of 7 dollars then the value of 15 dollars will become eventually near the value of 7. That is, if you give everybody 1000 dollars an hour, 100,000 dollar houses will go for 10,000,000 and buying a 5 dollar hamburger will cost you 500 dollars. It will still cost you more to paint your house, than to mow your lawn. And bosses will still get paid more than workers. And people with higher skills, better education, superior work quality, and higher levels of production will still get paid more, and there will still be inequality. You say we have been doing it wrong for 60 years, yet there are millions wearing designer jeans and are by their waist lines less than starving. And we are the richest country in the world, the policeman of the world and a bastion of human rights, civil rights, gender rights, gay rights and are a world leader in medicine, science, industry, weaponry, computer science and space exploration, as well as a leader in charitable works both private and governmental. What ever it is we have been doing for the last 60 years, is not without its upside. Labeling me a conservative and a hater because of being conservative is not a logical step. And suggesting that conservatives have both ruined the place and been in charge of the place cannot both be true, if the place is doing as well as it is doing. Trump says make America great again. Hilary says we are already great. Bernie and you say we are run by the rich. What do you think. Is this our country or somebody else's. If you want a revolution, who do you want to kill and who do you want to give the power to. The people that are in power are already people. Are already Americans that love their country, their families and each other. Why would you want to change dice when you are rolling sevens already. Regards, TAR

dimreepr, I disagree. Poverty is the automatic state. The first level in the hierarchy of needs is food clothing and shelter. On the savanna or in the woods, man against nature, we are naked and afraid, soon to die of thirst or hunger or disease or exposure or animal bite or poison plant. Civilization and family insulate us from those things. We are protected by our parents and they teach us how to survive. We in turn protect our children and teach them to survive. The first line of defense against automatic poverty is a plan to avoid it, and the execution of the plan. not my job to provide for 8 billion it is the 8 billion's job to provide for themselves for instance let's say I staked out an area and planted a pear tree and protected it from the birds, and the squirrels and the bear and come fall there was no food in the neighborhood but the pears I would share the pears but I would not let a cold person chop it down for firewood.