Athena

I really appreciate all the reality talk here! I am amusing the explanation of Temperate Soil, is about the value of biochar. I really like the idea that using oil is like using a credit card and there is a price to pay for this. My only concern is the statements were not strong enough. Add to debt the increasing populations of oil countries and what will happen when they run out of oil. Right now they are experiencing political unrest because they can not employ enough of their populations, and this will only get worse. Then they will all face the day of not enough oil to maintain their population's needs. This is insane. While increased security may lead to naturally reduced populations, I don't believe that is possible around the world. What is happening around the world today is like two trains using the same rails and headed towards each other. Look at China. It took drastic measures to reduce its population growth, and their educated young understand the necessity of this. That is the kind of education the world needs. The appetite of the US population is taking food off other people's tables. Gloating with pride in our ability to do this, is not exactly sane, because this creates problems around the world, as our dependency on imports increases. Wow, can you imagine an education system designed to help the young understand reality, instead of turning them into products for industry and the New World Order that is run by the Military Industrial Complex. Bottom line, we live on a finite planet and need to learn how to live within limits. Failure to do so is insane.

quoting Essay Essay you said so much and we ought to work on the patterns we see today. Identifying them and projecting where they get us. For sure thinking technology can resolve every problem, while maintaining denial of the problems we are creating, and the possibility of destroying our plant, is not wise! We seriously need to get away from a supernatural God who takes care of us, as soon as possible! I love how you compared religious attempts to resolve human problems with governmental efforts. But as we can see, there are some major problems with governmental attempts without a God standard, and tied to who wants what, and has the bucks to get the senator's ear. The dollar as the standard is not a good standard. However, resolving our shared problems is what democracy is about, and it is so much better to put up rules for keeping our water clean and safe, than to hold it is supernatural powers killing the people in town and burning witches. Democracy can do more for humanity than religions could, because its decisions are supposed to be based on the Greek concept of a God of nature/the cause and effect reason, the controlling force of the universe. But science alone is not enough. Being smart but unwise is not a good thing. And, is this not why we fear what some countries will do with atom bombs? We have decided Israel is wise enough to have an atom bomb, and Iran is not. Now from an unprejudiced God's point of view, what does this look like? The New Age occurs after developing the technology for instant mass communication around the world. We are in the resurrection now with geology and archeology uncovering the past, and with the Internet spreading all this information. We can access more information than ever before. Human consciousness is about to explode again. Are we ready for this? What makes the New Age separate from the past is the huge change in consciousness and the inability of those with future consciousness to relate to our primitive and relatively ignorant past consciousness. Like how in the world did people believe the stories in holy books as facts about reality when obviously things could not happen that way? Have you thought how life might have gone if the bible were a math and science book?

Wow, I think I can work with what you said. And in a private message, Moontanman said he thinks my idea of God is our humanity. Now if we don't get too tight with these ideas, yes! Obviously the Greek gods were made by humans. Each one is a archetype of human personalities, so they must be the result of observing humans and then writing stories about them. BUT THE GEM OF GREEK THINKING LEAD US TO SCIENCE! They gave the gods conflicts and made them argue with each other, expanding human consciousness as one god just can not do. The modern equivalent might be our division of sciences? Please note, the Greek philosophers asked how the gods resolve their differences, and concluded, reason, is the controlling force of the universe and even the gods are subject to reason. Someone posted about the acidification of the oceans, and the possibility of killing life in the oceans, and it is what we are doing that is causing this problem! Zeus's biggest fear is that with the technology of fire, we would discover all other technologies and rival the gods. The problem here is our lack of wisdom, and we need a concept of God for liberty and wisdom. Or as Vent so brightly said, an objective standard.

Quoting INow Thank you. I am also equating God with natural law, and does it matter if Cicero's understanding was not 100% correct? How does that change the Greek philosophical understanding of God? You know, a concept of God understood by more than one person, however, also a concept God that is not defined as religions do, and has nothing at all to do with superstition but is directly opposed to superstition. Think of the gods. They were not of one mind, and neither are humans. Of course our own version of ethics differs, just as the gods' did, and how did the gods resolve their differences? They argued until there was agreement on the best reasoning. That is what democracy is about. It is an imitation of the gods. When we understand the gods abstractly, we know they are concepts and different points of view, with different ways of handling problems. The way the Athenians related to them, cause human intelligence to explode! This is what democracy is suppose to do. I think you have erred when saying "one must assume that all men shared a common conception of good..". This is a question of logic, and as the gods we are to argue until we have agreement on the best reasoning. And tomorrow, when someone walks in with new information, we argue it again. This is what democracy is about. We are constantly questioning what we think we know and constantly seeking truth, when we understand our democracy, which unfortunately we do not. Seeking truth and attempting to learn of God are one and the same thing, when God is understood to be the laws of nature. As you said, that all babies are born with blank brains, is not exactly true, but it is the Germany philosophy of education that was adopted by the US in 1958. Liberal education, and the originally philosophy behind US education is we are all as different as the gods, and my grandmother's generation of teachers, taught respect of those differences, and attempted to help each child recognize his/her individual talents and interest. Public education is like a genii in a bottle. The defined purpose is the wish, and the students are the genii. Athens education for well rounded individual growth, was the original model of education in the US. We changed that wish with the 1958 National Defense Education Act, and replaced liberal education with education for technology and this is devastating to our democracy. We have been on the path Germany followed since 1958. Now people's minds are so closed, it seems impossible to have the discussions that are vital to democracy and liberty.

I love your question and scientifically the answer is yes, doing good for others results is us feeling good. Doing good for others is one of the top recommendations for getting out of a depression. I am sure if you google the subject you can find plenty of scientific evidence, because I have read a lot about it. This is kind of stuff that comes up in women's magazines. I would say this is the way God works. Not only are we programmed for such intrinsic reward, but we can observe the social benefits of helping each other as well, and know we are investing in a social organization we will reap the rewards in the future. Logical cause and effect thinking, tells us being nice to others will benefit us and our children and our children's children, as long as negative influences do not destroy our positive efforts. However, as Jimmydasaint said, this is complex and we don't all respond to stimuli the same, nor do we all reason the same. But in general I think it is safe to say, morale, is that high spirited feeling that comes out of believing we are doing the right thing, and when we are acting on virtues we feel strong, as though a greater power were behind us, and when we do we do something we know is wrong, the feeling isn't so good. Except if a person is psychopathic and then the brain map is different and the same rules do not apply. This isn't just about chemicals but also the brain's map, and our brain maps are individually different.

It would nice if we create a new Noah's ark and save endangered species.

Thank you Arete. Technology has changed the rules. When the Senior Companion program began in the 1960's, no one thought to control the conduct of a senior companion, beyond the laws that apply to everyone. The old training video has clients saying how having a senior companion is just like having family. In fact the program was developed not only for people who need assistance, but also older women who had no work experience, because they stayed home to care for family, and needed jobs, because a husband died or just walked out. These women had a domestic mentality, that is very different from our "professionalism" today. This old mentally was part of the organization I worked for, until the new hot shot came in. Special arrangements were made to keep senior companions and their clients together, and sincere friendships were encouraged. Our moral fiber was very different from what is today, and making it clear in the training that a senior companion is to be friendly but is not to become a friend. I wish I could show you the old training video, so you could compare the past taking advantage of domestic women and today's "professionalism". If you haven't lived in the past, you don't know how much liberty we have lost. This change began entering our society following WWII. This is really a different discussion, but directly related to this one. I could quote from my old books and make an argument that we have become what we defended our democracy against in two world wars. I have one book for teachers published in the 1960'tys, explaining why teachers must treat every student the same. It sounds really good, until one realizes how dehumanizing this is. Not only is this dehumanizing, but it also destroys our moral fabric, which has been based on human relationships since the beginning of human history. In fact, there was a time when jobs were not defined as we define them today. I am afraid no one has consciousness of this pre technological past, but seriously this defining of jobs and human conduct on the job, comes with adopting German bureaucracy and German education for technology and German philosophy. But if you can, imagine jobs not being defined, but everyone doing the things s/he can do the best, and people figuring out how to work together on their own. This is a completely different world than the one have today. There are good reasons for change, and also some very negative ramifications. About my housing and involvement with homeless people, I am becoming increasing aware of how dehumanizing our society has become, and how destructive this to our morality. Only a few people in this apartment building would leave a friend with cancer on the streets, as our society is doing today. The property manager believes I am doing the morally right, and many of my neighbors are supportive. Someone with authority has given me the paper work to add the woman with cancer to my contract. Where the problems come in is some people are anti social and fearful and complain to the manager that a homeless person entered the building. The young manager is afraid of loosing her job if she doesn't enforce the rules. Now the rules do not say a homeless person can not be our guest, but the way fear works, a complaint is made and the manager thinks she has to respond. I must not allow anyone in who might look homeless and scare someone. It is like not being allowed to left a black person in, when prejudice of blacks was okay. This is the mentality that resulted in good people doing nothing while Jews were removed from their homes and forced into the ghettos and then into concentration camps, with only a few non Jews being willing to risk their lives to protect Jews. This is why I argue the dangers of answering to man, instead of to God. See how it all goes together? Defining the jobs and increased efforts to control human conduct, in the work place and then our homes. People with good intentions are doing their best to take good care of us, and Tocqueville explained this evolution of our Christian democracy in his 1835 book, "Democracy in America". Laugh, and how many people are going to read this long post? But what the heck, I have been dying to explain all this since beginning the thread. If I am lucky, someone will actually read it and say something to advance the discussion, other than "God isn't real".

How would you say God gave man this force? This vital to this discussion of individual liberty and power. THANK YOU I believe it is more scientifically correct to call the programming of social animals pre-moral. It is something that is programmed into our genes, however, it does not become a moral, until we define it. It would be our ability to define a moral, that is also our ability to change the standard, no?

Moontanman, instead of defining God, maybe this thread would go better if we attempt to define liberty and justice, and hold in mind this is about our political organization, not our religious organization. Also the technological elements of this thread are becoming more and more obvious.

You might have said something I would enjoy reading, but I quit reading before getting there. I have studied the history of education from earliest times, and collect education books, from books about the history of education, to text books. What are you using to support the idea you know enough about education to argue the subject? Start a thread for education if you want to discuss it further, and PM me.

This mythology seriously does not belong in this thread, because it doesn't have anything to do with liberty and the political point of this thread. I wish people who start threads had the ability to delete post that derail the thread. Then it might be possible to keep a thread on topic. Thank you for bring this closer to the topic, but I would not say anyone has proven the ability to think abstractly. To think abstractly is to think about what we think. Arguing if the bible is fact or fiction is an endless concrete argument, not abstract thinking. God is a concrete thing that can either exist or not exist to a concrete thinker. God that is like the X in algebra is abstract. See the difference? Can you imagine trying to teach algebra and having the class argue if X is real or not? A teacher might what to kill if this argument never stops, and the lesson can never begin. What this thread is suppose to be about is personal liberty and power. I have said we need a concept of "God" to trump human authority. There is much I would like to say about this, but arguing if there is a God or not, and if Noah could fit all the different species of plants and animals on the ark, is completely derailing the thread. Education for technology is what followed liberal education in 1958. It is specifically for military and industrial purpose and we adopted it from Germany for military reasons. This is a directly related subject, but it would easily derail this thread. It goes with the idea that all babies are born are born with blank brains, and and anything can be written on them if the right technique is used. This of course assumes the state has the right to write on those brains, as opposed to teaching individuals to think for themselves, which is training the brain to function quite differently. Memorizing facts is not exactly equal to thinking. There is so much information on this I will just link to the google page and people can pick their own explanation http://www.google.co...lient=firefox-a Whatever, this thread is not going well, because we no longer use the Conceptual Method for education, and therefore, people are not prepared to discuss complex concepts requiring a foundation of simple concepts, which they no longer learn. If anyone picked up on Cicero's explanation of God, I missed it, and if no understands Cicero's explanation of God, discussions such as this one will never get beyond the annoying arguments about religious mythology, and if God is real or not. Gee is X real? Can you prove it? I am really frustrated, because I have argued like this for years and always get the same futility arguments of it God is real or not. Finally this time I realized what is wrong, and I thank everyone for helping to realize the problem. Now let us argue if X is real or not, and see how much we can learn about algebra, if we never past arguing if X is real. I wish people had better educations.

Oh shit! I hated putting this thread is religion, but knew because the word "God" is used, it would not stay in the Political forum for long. And I hate the religious argument that is ruining the thread. Can anyone get past the stupid argument about the existence of God which does not belong in this thread, and grasp the political argument? I hate it when I forget the word "not". You can not know the higher power without using higher level thinking.

Did anyone get what I said about concrete thinking and abstract thinking? Anyone? Here is a definition of the word abstract. </h2> You all are insisting on a concrete definition of God and that just doesn't work. The worst problem our nation has at the moment is education for technology, which teachings everyone to think concrete, instead of abstractly. This causes morality to crash and jeapordizes liberty. Instead of asking what is God, try asking how does God work, and see if you can get your brain functioning abstractly, which is a higher level of thinking. You can know the higher power, if you do not use higher level thinking.

Your own mind. If this were still true, I would not be writing this thread. Perhaps we should start a thread to argue this point? It has not been true since we adopted the German model of bureaucracy, and educated everyone for technology, like we train dogs. What in heavens does crusades, and Hitler and Jews have to do with this discussion? Except that the Germans made the state the highest authority, and did not put God above the state. How about discussing human sacrifices that have been done to please the gods, around the world? The God of Abraham religions, as well as the beliefs that lead to human sacrifices are examples of bad reasoning. So? Science comes out of philosophy. Athens was the Mother of Western Civilizations, Father of our sciences, and the parents of democracy. Science is contrary to the God of Abraham religions and so I am, but science is not contrary to God. Actually, through science what we are learning of God is awesome! Universal laws point us in the wrong direction? What do you mean? What are you talking about? By he do you mean God? Huh, how do you think God talks to us? Socrates was ordered to stop questioning the gods with youth or to drink the poison Hemlock. We should know, this occurred after Sparta defeated Athens in war, and radically changed Athens. However, no more radically than the US has been changed since replacing liberal education with education for technology. Germany was the modern world Sparta and the US the modern world Athens. History has repeated itself, except this time, Athens won the war. The US based its education on Athens, and was manifesting the democracy of Athens and defended this in two world wars. Following the second world war, the US replaced its liberal education with Germany's education for technology, and it has replaced its democracy, with the Military Industrial Complex that it defended its democracy against. Anyway- Here is Socrates charged with destroying religion and he says.... For Socrates, and me, God is as real as gravity, because of what I experience and my logic, but He is not the God of Abraham. This is the God of Nature, of which Cicero and Jefferson wrote, and science books and philosophy help us understand how this God works. However, because we can not directly directly God, we can not know God. When people start telling you they know God, they know God not.

Oh, oh, it is you Moontanman. Interesting how we read someone differently when we know that person. I say as I put my guns back into their holsters. Actually government had its reasons for witch hunting, and I am shocked by what is going on today, because we have dropped the lessons of history, and are being as ignorant today. Especially with the drug laws and confiscating people's property. Given the history of the witch hunts, I didn't think this would happen again. There is a lot of information about secular witch hunters, and we seriously need to regain this lesson from the past. </h3> What stopped the witch hunts, is finally enough people with a degree of power, who knew good people who were taken as witches, were able to stop the witch hunts. This wasn't the case when the witch hunters picked on poor old women who no one liked. But when they started charging landed and well known people with witch craft, the friends and family of these people objected to what was happening. It was not disbelief in witches and demons, but having family and friends who knew so and so wasn't a witch, and if so and so isn't a witch than maybe something is wrong with the witch hunts. The other source of information about God is the Greek and Roman classics. This is where humanism comes from and it is the foundation of our liberty. This is where the God of Nature comes from. You know that God of Nature Thomas Jefferson wrote about in the Declaration of Independence, and Cicero wrote about before him. Jefferson later went on to edit the bible so it is compatible with science and today we can buy copies of his edited bibles. There is no superstition associated with this God. Think about this, before science there was philosophy. Especially the Greeks examined the important things. They questioned everything, from the elements to the meaning of being a good man, and the gods. They concluded reason is the controlling force of the universe, and even the gods are subject to reason. Eventually, the notion of many gods gives way to one controlling force of the universe, and this god is not known through mythology, but through science. Why our liberty requires a God is so simple I am really surprised there is argument. I will try to explain this again. A king ordered a man be killed and that no one could bury him. His sister buried him anyway. The king was furious and demanded to know why she went against his will, considering he was the highest authority in the land, and could order she be killed to. Her argument is, even before there were kings, sisters buried their brothers. This is telling the king he is not the highest authority. There is a power greater than kings, and we call this power God. This is historical so, even before Christianity, and every where around the world. If we do not agree there is a greater power than the king's, we no longer have the liberty to go against the kings dictates, because without a God, the king is the highest authority/power, or our government is the highest power with the last word, and I seriously do not like what is happening to government power. This is why I am opposing atheist. It is not about what others believe about God, but the right to defy human authority with the argument that there is a higher authority. Deist do not believe in an intervening God. The problem with this thread is people are religion, and this is really off topic, because the subject is really about authority. Who has it and who does not. Our democracy begins with this question, "To whom does God give his authority?" The defining answer is, "Everyone". Now if you say there is no God, you give the government authority and give up your liberty. Moontanman, this notion of God is dangerous only to governing authority. Yes, it can justify anything, but the justifications are still subject to reason, and we all subject to reason. No I am not suggesting that and if you read Cicero you would get the God of nature can not be manipulated. If you are make the mistake of going to close to the shore and take your ship up on the rocks, no God is going to save you. Your prayers, sacrifices and burning of candles make no difference. Another way of saying this is, mother nature doesn't care who lives and who dies. Now understand mother nature abstractly instead of concretely. HEY, THAT IS THE PROBLEM! YOU ALL ARE THINKING CONCRETELY, INSTEAD OF ABSTRACTLY. THIS IS THE WORST PROBLEM WITH EDUCATION FOR TECHNOLOGY. THE TRULY IMPORTANT THINKING IS ABSTRACT AND THE PEOPLE HERE ARE NOT THINKING ABSTRACTLY. CONCRETE THINKING IS LOWER LEVEL THINKING, AND WHAT EDUCATION FOR TECHNOLOGY HAS TAUGHT PEOPLE TO DO. NO WONDER THIS DISCUSSION IS AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY. Your arguments are based on a false God, and superstition, and no this is not the only way to understand God. Study nature! Thanks everyone. You have taken me to a new level of understanding.

We have our own reason, and do not have to rely on the written word of another. And in fact, we should not rely on the written word of another. Unfortunately, I am out of time, but Cicero's reasoning is perhaps the most important reasoning to me, and you are so wrong to believe my concept of morals is separate from my understanding of God, and cause and effect, or science if you like. Cicero explains this best. http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Cicero.html I repeat, conscience is what comes out of knowledge, our awareness of what is. We can not know God, but we can become of aware of what is and infer something about God. Ultimately, the authority is our own individual authority, not another human, or anything another human might write. Understanding this is understanding liberty. This is awareness of much more than myself and the present moment. It is includes awareness of cause and effect, past and future. If I do wrong, my great grandchildren will suffer. If I do right, maybe my great grandchildren will enjoy the benefits democracy, instead of the tyranny of which Tocqueville wrote.

What about Jews? Their stay in Babylon and what they share with Zoroastrianism is interesting. We really don't know how separate Zoroastrianism is from the ideas originating in India, but we can know before Zoroastrianism was over come by superstition, Cyrus freed the Jews and ordered that Peria would rebuild their temple. We can know that the Hebrew God of Abraham was one of many, and not so different from other gods. Making this god believable to people in the day. In fact, the Jewish knowledge of spells was so respected, their incantations can be found in Egyptian tombs. What about the Aztecs who also believed they were God's chosen people. Their are so many parallels between Jewish and Aztec mythology, that it gives credence to the Book of Mormon. There is so much Egyptian theology mixed in Christianity, we can hardly speak of religious explanations without including it. And then of course we need to speak of Hellenism and the meaning of "in the beginning was the word", and the terrible conflict between Hellenist and Jews! And the role Mirthraism plays in Christian mythology. Taoism, of course, goes nicely with quantum physics, and there was a tribe in Africa that had a golden chair given to their lead by God. My point is, if we are to argue about God, we really need to get beyond the Christian bible. But this is not necessary for this thread, which is about what God has to do with personal liberty and power.

Excuse me, why are you using the bible as the authority about God?

You could use more information. The witch hunts were more secular than religious. Being a witch hunter and prosecutor was considered the high science of the day, and governments pursued the witch hunts for secular reasons. http://departments.kings.edu/womens_history/witch/werror.html#Church We have the same religion today, and do not have witch hunts, so obviously it is not the religion that causes witch hunts. Human authority can be wrong, as it has been many times, and we must not put too much faith in it. Yes, I have said we need to study nature and then can infer something about God, and yes, this is not religion. It is not religion until we define God, and the people of Athens had a problem with letting Christians define God. So do I. Because the Christians, and others, have given us a faulted explanation of God, that doesn't mean a God is not possible, and having one is very important to liberty.

Please, give me an example of God imposing restrictions. There is no way God can impose restrictions like a government does. This absolutely is not possible.

I am afraid you are making a serious and dangerous mistake!!! Thank you so much for making it possible for me to address the mistake you have made the what the made the US critically different from Germany, before we replaced our liberal education with Germany's education for technology. The German people are very nice people, but they have a regretible history, that those educated for technology in the US are repeating. This is why I opened this thread, and sincerely thank you all for helping me have a better understanding of the problem. Martin Luther, the man we credit for starting the Protestant Reformation, and whose name sake Martin Luther King, we will be celebrating tomorrow, totally believed the witch hunts were necessary, and equally believed Jews were the worse human beings on earth. The witch hunts started in Germany and the more witches that were found, the more everyone believed in witches. This is one example of human authority being tragically wrong! The next easiest example is the persecution of Jews in the 1940's. It is today's events that moved me to open this subject, and I have asked, what is difference between hiding a homeless woman in my home so she can recover from breast surgery, and hiding a Jew? I will tell you the difference. Our homeless people aren't Jews, however, the prejudice is the same, and our reliance on human authority is the same, and the destruction of our liberty is the same. I grieve the failure to teach our young what made the US difference, and to give them a good understanding of liberty and what God has to do that liberty. Once we knew it was our duty to oppose authority when we believed it was wrong, and I literally feel a heavy weight on my heart when arguing against your all's faith in human authority. We no longer teach, it is our duty to oppose authority when we believe those in the seats of authority are wrong. This is the importance of answering to God, instead of man. It prevents or stops things like witch hunts and the persecution of Jews, and I hope, the persecution of the homeless, and destruction of our liberty. What concerns me most is the arguments you all are making, and the loss of our liberty. I think you all are making a very serious mistake. What I am gaining most from this, is confidence I must address the religious issue. I wanted to avoid the religious issue and that stopped me from completing a book. Now I realize how important it is that I directly address the religious issue. Thank you. Absolutely not. How does studying nature, and ultimately relying on one's own judgment, become superstition?

Capra's god is a pantheistic God, and that is quit agreeable with my understanding of God. Now do you want to define the physics of my reaction to your post? There is something happening that is not just matter. Thought and spirit are not matter. Our present society has taken the Christian anti spiritualism too far, but than the religion comes out of materialistic Rome, and is all mixed up with the popular superstition at the time. Christianity is really quit paradoxical in that way. However, a rock is not going to jump up and engage in a discussion of God, because God is asleep in rocks and minerals, waking in animals, to know self in man. We are God's consciousness, and I do not give you the right to deny me this belief. However, I have a big problem with believing in other people's experiences of God. I can believe only in my own, and this is what liberty is about. If you do not experience God, fine, some people are color blind. We are different. But liberty means you can not deny me my experience of God. You can not force the Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Aztec, beliefs of God on me, nor force the limitations on me that are forced on all, when no concept of God is tolerated. Back to Socrates cave. I am not staying in that cave. I am claiming the liberty to leave it. If I do something on the belief it is what God would have me do, I can be declare me insane, or given the meaning of liberty to do as I believe God would us do. This is the essential meaning of liberty. Property rights, give an employer the right to fire me but who owns government jobs? We the people. Property rights, give property owners the right to evict me for no reason at all, with a 30 day no cause eviction notice. Property rights trump God right now, but in the long run, the consequences of crushing liberty will not be good. Hopefully, I am getting closer to explaining what God has to do with our liberty. Thank you for the arguments. You better depend on something besides how well you can sail, or you will end up swimming and there is a limit to how we can be in the water. With your knowledge of sailing, what are the things you want to be aware of besides how to sail, which by the way is a technology? Might you want to depend on the construction of sail boat as well, and perhaps a devise for figuring where you are when sitting in the middle of the ocean. In other words, isn't technology part of your confidence? Super thank you for the earthquake answer! And what definition of God are you using? As I understand God, earthquakes do happen, but they have nothing to do with human activity, and throwing people in the volcano, or otherwise sacrificing humans, will not stop earthquakes, nor cause the rain to fall. That is not how nature works, and to know God, we must study nature, and then we can only infer something about God. Because we do not experience God directly, we can not know God, and I certainly do not rely holy books, except to make note of where they are in agreement, and if given my own experience, this seems rational. This pretty well, eliminates superstition. And your argument seems to depend on superstition.

Laugh, are you sure it isn't technology that gives you so much confidence? I much rather cross an ocean with today's technology than do so in the Mayflower. I think technology has conditioned us to think in terms of what we can do, rather than call on God. For sure if one is farming, it is really nice to know we are not completely dependent on the weather for our water, and we can stop bugs with chemicals, and grasshoppers will not so completely destroy the vegetation that we have nothing to eat but grasshoppers. You may not be aware of it, but for sure technology has influenced how you think. As for that God people have so much trouble with, it is most unfortunate we replaced liberal education with education for technology. Perhaps we have enough technology now, to return to liberal education and the understanding of God and morals that a democracy needs. Does anyone today know, God is unknown? There are no grounds for all the complaints against God. Can anyone give me an example of a God doing anything that denies us liberty, or in any other way harms us?

Wouldn't it be nice to have an instant zapper that zapped spammers immediately, and so painfully they were discouraged from doing it again. Unsubscribing seems to have resolved the problem. Knock on wood.