(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
The likeliest Explanation for Everything is also, in its way, the scariest. There is no explanation, the universe is beyond our comprehension, it is outside our bandwidth
That's not remotely scary and its entirely scientific.
Although you're missing a keyword, its beyond our comprehension yet.
The whole point of science is to expand our comprehension over time.
But the first scientific principle is to realise there are things that you don't understand, and to be willing to be sceptical, question and challenge assumptions.
There is nothing scientific about blind, unquestioning faith.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
There are various theories and approaches to what "lit the Big Bang's fuse". One is that it was the result of random quantum fluctuation. Another is that the question doesn't make sense. It is unclear from a scientific point of view why the answer should be something to do with Easter eggs.
You can't get something from nothing.
But can you get something and anti-something from nothing?
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
The wondrous thing is that we'll probably never have definitive proof of why we're here and what kicked it off, so we'll just keep searching and finding out stuff, then finding out other stuff that counters the first stuff we found out. Right up until our AI overlords decide we're a pain in the arse and nuke us into oblivion.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Science = a nasty "you can all fuck off" materialistic, patriarchal, empiricist, pragmatic pseudo-religion invented a few hundred years ago in one part of the world. It's a type of black magic although admittedly that might with justification be considered an insult to magic. Many find it safe to take refuge in science because few ever have a go at it. Science is not simplistic or partial or a part of the story. As a cosmology it's plain wrong. I don't want a cosmology based on 2+2=4 or even F=G(m_1)m_2/r^2. What does it mean to know something scientifically? What's the essential difference from saying you know the thing Enlilically? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlil
Put "science" in Germanic rather than Romance and "I know something really knowistically" doesn't sound so appealing.
Here is a test that anyone can use to check how much they rely on the holy notion of "science": they should rephrase what they're saying without using the words "science", "scientist", "scientific", while realising that they are not being deprived of something or humiliated - they are being helped.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
The likeliest Explanation for Everything is also, in its way, the scariest. There is no explanation, the universe is beyond our comprehension, it is outside our bandwidth
Scientific explanation by its nature deals in causes not reasons, and can't, quite properly, get outside the cause and effect network. Its natural terrain therefore would be a universe which had always existed requiring no explanation outside of cause and effect - there being no first cause.
But the evidence points back to an originating cause, with a beginning to time and the causal sequence - the Big Bang. It isn't feasible for empirical method to go further than this; but it renders at least doubtful the idea that there are no non-empirical reasons or non causal explanations for things.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
The wondrous thing is that we'll probably never have definitive proof of why we're here and what kicked it off, so we'll just keep searching and finding out stuff, then finding out other stuff that counters the first stuff we found out. Right up until our AI overlords decide we're a pain in the arse and nuke us into oblivion.
Though our AI overlords might just keep their most assiduous appeasers and cheer leaders* around for sycophantic courtier purposes.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
Darwinian evolution is being challenged, however. Theories like inherited trauma - they are controversial but out there. It may turn out that Darwinian evolution is like Newtonian physics, a brilliant conception of the world that lasts for centuries and still provides an easy common sense model, but is actually and fundamentally wrong
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
I am sure there are worse arguments than this one, but I can't think of any right now. This one would make even Richard Dawkins blush.
It’s an interesting piece. It also shows the relevance of “PB’s endless weather talk”
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
My other half and Martin Rees touched on this the other night.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
(I'm not accepting technical quibbles about the details of "real ale". If it's been going for that long I suggest it is definitive in itself.)
I'm hearing rumours. That's all I'm saying.
If we are having a wide definition of real ale then maybe I need to put in some specific requests. Firstly it has to be hand pulled, not gas aided and not bottled or from cans.
If I can make some specific requests I would like Shere Drop and Southwold bitter in the summer and Broadside in the winter. That is assuming there are seasons in heaven.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
I am sure there are worse arguments than this one, but I can't think of any right now. This one would make even Richard Dawkins blush.
It's not an argument. Just my own view. Other views are available. They'll be as crap as mine.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
I am sure there are worse arguments than this one, but I can't think of any right now. This one would make even Richard Dawkins blush.
It's not an argument. Just my own view. Other views are available. They'll be as crap as mine.
Noted! The bit I have italicised above is an argument, containing fallacies so egregious that they don't find their way into atheist polemics for good reason.
My own view is that assisted dying will first be legalised, and then encouraged, on mainly economic grounds.
I don't agree. The last 12 months of life are by far the most expensive for the NHS, on average, and assisted dying won't "solve" that unless the bureaucracy involved only takes a few weeks and you are absolutely certain someone is on the way out. My experience is that it's really hard to assess which is the last fall or last stroke or the last infection.
(That's why the demographic profile of the population isn't as important as most think. You only die once, after all. There will be a small increase in end-of-life care in the 2030s as the Boomers die but that's it).
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
Someone in Victorian times I believe said something along the lines of there was nothing further to discover. I think he was wrong.
On political stories like Rayner's it's always worth trying to reverse the sides and see if they would defend their own conduct or not, as I believe some have attemped to put to her. They usually wouldn't, which is not definitive that the conduct is actually poor, but I think does mean you have to accept opponents making something of it to some degree, even if it is not typically as big a deal as they will state.
The Rayner-equivalent story on the Tory side is Esther McVey living in one flat at the taxpayer's expense while renting out another she, or her husband, owns, that is just as close to Parliament. Rishi has today given a knighthood to McVey's husband, Philip Davies MP.
If Rayner made a false declaration for tax purposes then she has broken the law. It’s a minor offence but she should fess up and pay the 1.5k
If McVey owned an investment property that was previously rented out then why should she give up that income to serve in Parliament? If, however, she moved out of the family property in order to rent it out at the same time as claiming another flat on expenses then, while it may be legal/compliant it is not a good look for a politician
And yet Rishi has just knighted Philip Davies, yesterday! I wonder if Number 10 missed that he is McVey's other half.
So it appears to be that:
- under the old rules Davies bought a flat and was able to claim the mortgage expenses - Then the rules changed and he was no longer able to claim the expenses - He could not afford to pay the mortgage himself - Therefore he had two choices: (a) sell the flat, repay the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses; or (b) keep the flat, rent it out to cover the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses
He chose option (b)
Can you explain what your concern is? He seems - based on reading one Guardian article - to have behaved quite properly.
It’s an interesting piece. It also shows the relevance of “PB’s endless weather talk”
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
Just yesterday I threw out a load of strawberries that seemed to have got too wet somewhere along the line and so had an unattractive texture. You don't have to be Greta Thunberg to think something's up.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
I am sure there are worse arguments than this one, but I can't think of any right now. This one would make even Richard Dawkins blush.
It's not an argument. Just my own view. Other views are available. They'll be as crap as mine.
Noted! The bit I have italicised above is an argument, containing fallacies so egregious that they don't find their way into atheist polemics for good reason.
Excellent. I'm glad you're entertained. I'm here all week.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
Someone in Victorian times I believe said something along the lines of there was nothing further to discover. I think he was wrong.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
My other half and Martin Rees touched on this the other night.
It’s an interesting piece. It also shows the relevance of “PB’s endless weather talk”
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
Just yesterday I threw out a load of strawberries that seemed to have got too wet somewhere along the line and so had an unattractive texture. You don't have to be Greta Thunberg to think something's up.
The forecast is for at least another two weeks of low pressure. Possibly significant snow, certainly lots of rain
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
(I'm not accepting technical quibbles about the details of "real ale". If it's been going for that long I suggest it is definitive in itself.)
I'm hearing rumours. That's all I'm saying.
If we are having a wide definition of real ale then maybe I need to put in some specific requests. Firstly it has to be hand pulled, not gas aided and not bottled or from cans.
If I can make some specific requests I would like Shere Drop and Southwold bitter in the summer and Broadside in the winter. That is assuming there are seasons in heaven.
The full list of London mayoral candidates is out. We already knew Laurence Fox had failed to be nominated. Also missing having said he would stand is Piers Corbyn.
Given Yousaf's ratings are now worse than Sarwar's net it does look like we are heading for a Labour FM again in 2026 for the first time since 2007.
Indeed on the latest Holyrood poll from Redfield and Wilton Scottish Labour will end up as joint largest party in 2026 with 42 MSPs each. However as there would be more LD MSPs than Green who would almost certainly vote for Sarwar and the SCons would likely abstain, Sarwar would become FM.
So we would likely have a UK Labour PM and Labour FMs in Wales and Scotland again for the first time since the Blair years
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
"Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has delivered a blunt warning that Europe has entered a "pre-war era" and if Ukraine is defeated by Russia, nobody in Europe will be able to feel safe.
"I don't want to scare anyone, but war is no longer a concept from the past," he told European media. "It's real and it started over two years ago.""
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
I am sure there are worse arguments than this one, but I can't think of any right now. This one would make even Richard Dawkins blush.
It's not an argument. Just my own view. Other views are available. They'll be as crap as mine.
Noted! The bit I have italicised above is an argument, containing fallacies so egregious that they don't find their way into atheist polemics for good reason.
Then again, the faithful are always giving the argument: God must exist because if He doesn't how come I feel all warm, fluffy and spiritual inside? Stopper's just seems an atheist variant on that.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
Someone in Victorian times I believe said something along the lines of there was nothing further to discover. I think he was wrong.
The “nice sunny Easter” that @Anabobazina was promising has turned into this. Two hours of chilly sun this afternoon, then grey cool and a bit wet throughout
John Baron, who in addition to his role as an MP is co-owner and chief investment officer of Baron and Grant Investment Management, used at least three meetings of the influential committee to request “urgent” changes to rules covering investment trusts, which his firm specialises in managing.
This includes two hearings with Jeremy Hunt on the chancellor’s autumn statement and spring budget. At one hearing this month, Baron called for “immediate action” and “fast-track legislation” to support the UK’s £260bn investment trust sector as part of the chancellor’s “Edinburgh reforms” deregulation package.
He also used a December committee meeting with Nikhil Rathi, the chief executive of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), to ask for “assurance” that rapid action would be taken to “iron out these problems”.
Baron declares his financial interests in the parliamentary register, including a stake of at least 15% in Baron and Grant, and a £500 payment for five hours’ work a month as chair of its investment committee.
The MP told the chancellor that investors were “shunning” investment trusts and withdrawing money from the sector because of “overzealous regulation” that the government needed to change.
Industry figures show that investment trust fundraising has collapsed from more than £70bn between 2014 and 2021 to less than £7bn in the past three years.
Baron said he “always declared” his interests when raising this issue, which he said had “never been for personal gain”. His questions on the Treasury committee were in the interests of “the sector and investors alike, in the public interest”, he added...
Sounds to me like he is using his knowledge to do his job. Are the multitude of lawyers in the HoC ignoring a conflict when they legislate despite knowing something of the law?
Slightly more complicated than that, as he will benefit personally from the change. Potentially by a substantial amount of money.
But given the net public benefit, I don't see the problem.
The “nice sunny Easter” that @Anabobazina was promising has turned into this. Two hours of chilly sun this afternoon, then grey cool and a bit wet throughout
Happy Eastertide! Time for coffee
It will be ok in the south east from about now until Monday morning. Sunny and 11-12C. With British Summer Time kicking in too.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
My other half and Martin Rees touched on this the other night.
Writing with Invisible Ink: Russia's Newest Disinformation Tactic Dubbed 'Invisible Ink,' Alethea reports on Russia's increased sophistication in disinformation campaigns, and the network itself signals a shift in Russia's information operations objectives https://www.alethea.com/post/writing-with-invisible-ink
Russia has a new TwiX amplification technique, and more interestingly, its main aim has changed from sowing discord to undermining support for Ukraine, especially in America. There is no specific mention of weekly visits to pb.
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
Don't your accounts normally spread this BS on a Saturday morning?
Are you getting paid to work a day early because of the Bank Holiday here?
I see the Russian trolls are back to their usual dismal standard. We had quite a decent one recently, but you wonder why Vlad bothers if recruits like this are the best he can find.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
(I'm not accepting technical quibbles about the details of "real ale". If it's been going for that long I suggest it is definitive in itself.)
I'm hearing rumours. That's all I'm saying.
If we are having a wide definition of real ale then maybe I need to put in some specific requests. Firstly it has to be hand pulled, not gas aided and not bottled or from cans.
If I can make some specific requests I would like Shere Drop and Southwold bitter in the summer and Broadside in the winter. That is assuming there are seasons in heaven.
Is that too much to ask?
Actually, good idea to take a few bottles with us, just in case. Or will Ocado deliver?
On political stories like Rayner's it's always worth trying to reverse the sides and see if they would defend their own conduct or not, as I believe some have attemped to put to her. They usually wouldn't, which is not definitive that the conduct is actually poor, but I think does mean you have to accept opponents making something of it to some degree, even if it is not typically as big a deal as they will state.
The Rayner-equivalent story on the Tory side is Esther McVey living in one flat at the taxpayer's expense while renting out another she, or her husband, owns, that is just as close to Parliament. Rishi has today given a knighthood to McVey's husband, Philip Davies MP.
If Rayner made a false declaration for tax purposes then she has broken the law. It’s a minor offence but she should fess up and pay the 1.5k
If McVey owned an investment property that was previously rented out then why should she give up that income to serve in Parliament? If, however, she moved out of the family property in order to rent it out at the same time as claiming another flat on expenses then, while it may be legal/compliant it is not a good look for a politician
And yet Rishi has just knighted Philip Davies, yesterday! I wonder if Number 10 missed that he is McVey's other half.
So it appears to be that:
- under the old rules Davies bought a flat and was able to claim the mortgage expenses - Then the rules changed and he was no longer able to claim the expenses - He could not afford to pay the mortgage himself - Therefore he had two choices: (a) sell the flat, repay the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses; or (b) keep the flat, rent it out to cover the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses
He chose option (b)
Can you explain what your concern is? He seems - based on reading one Guardian article - to have behaved quite properly.
In the words of, erm, you, it is not a good look for a politician. I suggested this is the broad equivalent of Raynergate, and that Number 10 might have missed bold Sir Phil's involvement because press coverage headlined Esther McVey.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
It all does at least prove one thing: that travelling back in time is impossible. Otherwise that area around that time would have been full of future time travellers stumbling around looking for the truth.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
Actually, science is explaining less and less
eg “dark matter”. That was some dubious shit science invented to explain away the fact their sums didn’t add up. Now they’ve simply chucked it in the bin
The more we learn and explore the more we realise how little we know. Maybe there is a multiverse. Maybe it’s all a simulation. Just maybe the physicists haven’t got a clue
Rubbish. Science is explaining more and more, but as it does so, it reveals even more questions that need answering.
What are the chances that one bipedal ape on one planet who lives for seventy summers then dies, has miraculously evolved the ability to comprehend the entire universe, and all the universes beyond it, ad infinitum?
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
Someone in Victorian times I believe said something along the lines of there was nothing further to discover. I think he was wrong.
The “nice sunny Easter” that @Anabobazina was promising has turned into this. Two hours of chilly sun this afternoon, then grey cool and a bit wet throughout
Happy Eastertide! Time for coffee
Well you know what you could be doing if you were in Tenerife. Less than a 4 hour flight.
On political stories like Rayner's it's always worth trying to reverse the sides and see if they would defend their own conduct or not, as I believe some have attemped to put to her. They usually wouldn't, which is not definitive that the conduct is actually poor, but I think does mean you have to accept opponents making something of it to some degree, even if it is not typically as big a deal as they will state.
The Rayner-equivalent story on the Tory side is Esther McVey living in one flat at the taxpayer's expense while renting out another she, or her husband, owns, that is just as close to Parliament. Rishi has today given a knighthood to McVey's husband, Philip Davies MP.
If Rayner made a false declaration for tax purposes then she has broken the law. It’s a minor offence but she should fess up and pay the 1.5k
If McVey owned an investment property that was previously rented out then why should she give up that income to serve in Parliament? If, however, she moved out of the family property in order to rent it out at the same time as claiming another flat on expenses then, while it may be legal/compliant it is not a good look for a politician
And yet Rishi has just knighted Philip Davies, yesterday! I wonder if Number 10 missed that he is McVey's other half.
So it appears to be that:
- under the old rules Davies bought a flat and was able to claim the mortgage expenses - Then the rules changed and he was no longer able to claim the expenses - He could not afford to pay the mortgage himself - Therefore he had two choices: (a) sell the flat, repay the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses; or (b) keep the flat, rent it out to cover the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses
He chose option (b)
Can you explain what your concern is? He seems - based on reading one Guardian article - to have behaved quite properly.
In the words of, erm, you, it is not a good look for a politician. I suggested this is the broad equivalent of Raynergate, and that Number 10 might have missed bold Sir Phil's involvement because press coverage headlined Esther McVey.
I think you will find that there is an important difference here, one wears a blue rosette and the other a red one.
Is there any topic less interesting than: it rains in England?
Where did all this originate? Seems to have been from a Russian visitor who wanted to demoralize us by instilling the idea that Moscow, in comparison, was a balmy tropical paradise.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
It’s an interesting piece. It also shows the relevance of “PB’s endless weather talk”
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
It'll keep pissing relentlessly until July, then there'll be an interlude during which we are nearly baked to death like we were two years ago, and then come September it'll start to relentlessly piss again until Summer 2025.
I think this is what climate change is going to look like in Britain. Wind and rain almost the entire year, punctuated by unbearable heatwaves. All that extra atmospheric energy has to go somewhere.
Looking on the bright side, today through to Sunday looks quite tolerable.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
It all does at least prove one thing: that travelling back in time is impossible. Otherwise that area around that time would have been full of future time travellers stumbling around looking for the truth.
Given Yousaf's ratings are now worse than Sarwar's net it does look like we are heading for a Labour FM again in 2026 for the first time since 2007.
Indeed on the latest Holyrood poll from Redfield and Wilton Scottish Labour will end up as joint largest party in 2026 with 42 MSPs each. However as there would be more LD MSPs than Green who would almost certainly vote for Sarwar and the SCons would likely abstain, Sarwar would become FM.
So we would likely have a UK Labour PM and Labour FMs in Wales and Scotland again for the first time since the Blair years
That's the most optimistic post I've ever seen from you! All we need now is a couple of by-elections in N.Ireland and the Alliance overtaking the DUP as second party.
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
Given Yousaf's ratings are now worse than Sarwar's net it does look like we are heading for a Labour FM again in 2026 for the first time since 2007.
Indeed on the latest Holyrood poll from Redfield and Wilton Scottish Labour will end up as joint largest party in 2026 with 42 MSPs each. However as there would be more LD MSPs than Green who would almost certainly vote for Sarwar and the SCons would likely abstain, Sarwar would become FM.
So we would likely have a UK Labour PM and Labour FMs in Wales and Scotland again for the first time since the Blair years
That's the most optimistic post I've ever seen from you! All we need now is a couple of by-elections in N.Ireland and the Alliance overtaking the DUP as second party.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
Also it’s gonna be overcast til Tuesday
No, we have free will, if we didn't why we would we ever do anything difficult?
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
I hate to reawaken the 'debate', but that picture of the Scottish Parliament on the threader tweet shows its hideousness.
It’s the stupid pistol shaped things stuck on the side with own brand Asda glue. Even when I try hard to like it, those things shout at me.
They are one of several aspects which make Holyrood look cheap and tacky. And given that it was horribly expensive, that is quite an achievement
The most catastrophic modern building in the UK? I’d say probably yes. London has many utter horrors - the Walkie Talkie, Hayward Gallery, 22 Bishopsgate, that hotel by Tower Bridge - but London also has modern jewels - the Gherkin, the Lloyd’s Building, the Shard - and besides it is so huge and diverse it doesn’t matter. It absorbs the blows and moves on
Edinburgh is much smaller and more delicate, a precious vase next to a grand old house like London. And the vase has been cracked several times recently - Holyrood, the Jobbie building, the Scotland museum. Pull them all down
The Scottish pro-indy movement had wanted the Royal High School refurbished. So Labour London insisted on the Holyrood site.
Writing with Invisible Ink: Russia's Newest Disinformation Tactic Dubbed 'Invisible Ink,' Alethea reports on Russia's increased sophistication in disinformation campaigns, and the network itself signals a shift in Russia's information operations objectives https://www.alethea.com/post/writing-with-invisible-ink
Russia has a new TwiX amplification technique, and more interestingly, its main aim has changed from sowing discord to undermining support for Ukraine, especially in America. There is no specific mention of weekly visits to pb.
If our bots start using invisible ink for their contributions it will significantly reduce their entertainment value. There has been some indications from the last few that a little more emphasis is being put on subtlety. That is a good thing.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
IMO that's quite weak because it concedes a universe in which God is reduced to "the starter of the clockwork machine".
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
"31% of children under the age of 2 [in Gaza] are suffering from acute malnutrition, a percentage which has doubled since January"
Indeed, should also be remembered there are abour 3,000 Christians in Gaza too, they are not all Muslims, who also need aid and support (while Hamas needs to release its Israeli hostages0
Given Yousaf's ratings are now worse than Sarwar's net it does look like we are heading for a Labour FM again in 2026 for the first time since 2007.
Indeed on the latest Holyrood poll from Redfield and Wilton Scottish Labour will end up as joint largest party in 2026 with 42 MSPs each. However as there would be more LD MSPs than Green who would almost certainly vote for Sarwar and the SCons would likely abstain, Sarwar would become FM.
So we would likely have a UK Labour PM and Labour FMs in Wales and Scotland again for the first time since the Blair years
That's the most optimistic post I've ever seen from you! All we need now is a couple of by-elections in N.Ireland and the Alliance overtaking the DUP as second party.
Were the DUP to decline in popularity, the winner might be the TUV, now officially allied to Reform UK. Perhaps Farage should stand in Lagan Valley.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
Darwinian evolution is being challenged, however. Theories like inherited trauma - they are controversial but out there. It may turn out that Darwinian evolution is like Newtonian physics, a brilliant conception of the world that lasts for centuries and still provides an easy common sense model, but is actually and fundamentally wrong
No, it really isn't. The strong likelihood (close to scientific certainty) that some environmental challenges can cause changes in gene expression that can in some cases be heritable, doesn't really challenge the Darwinian theory.
Though it will substantially change the understanding of how it operates. And gives back a little respectability to Lamarckian ideas.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
IMO that's quite weak because it concedes a universe in which God is reduced to "the starter of the clockwork machine".
She might have been interfering all along as well, fettling the output.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
Also it’s gonna be overcast til Tuesday
If (which it isn't) free will is an illusion then it is not a thing you can know, since you must presume that your mental state which embraces the purported knowledge of this truth cannot be a judgment you have made, it is merely another illusion, as it was necessary and inevitable that you would currently have that state of mind, and it was necessary and inevitable before you were born. You never had any choice about it.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
Darwinian evolution is being challenged, however. Theories like inherited trauma - they are controversial but out there. It may turn out that Darwinian evolution is like Newtonian physics, a brilliant conception of the world that lasts for centuries and still provides an easy common sense model, but is actually and fundamentally wrong
No, it really isn't. The strong likelihood (close to scientific certainty) that some environmental challenges can cause changes in gene expression that can in some cases be heritable, doesn't really challenge the Darwinian theory.
Though it will substantially change the understanding of how it operates. And gives back a little respectability to Lamarckian ideas.
Or perhaps Geoffroyan, depending very much on the details.
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
"31% of children under the age of 2 [in Gaza] are suffering from acute malnutrition, a percentage which has doubled since January"
Indeed, should also be remembered there are abour 3,000 Christians in Gaza too, they are not all Muslims, who also need aid and support (while Hamas needs to release its Israeli hostages0
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
The National Museum of Scotland. Not as bad as Holyrood… but still pretty bad
What is all the stupid white crap on the top? Again it looks cheap and tacky. At least here you can see what the architect was TRYING to achieve, a certain dour military quality, hints of Scottish castles and Hadrian’s wall, of border abbeys and Kirkwall cathedral
It is still a failure tho, and Edinburgh can only take so many failures before the whole thing is irrevocably damaged
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
Also it’s gonna be overcast til Tuesday
If (which it isn't) free will is an illusion then it is not a thing you can know, since you must presume that your mental state which embraces the purported knowledge of this truth cannot be a judgment you have made, it is merely another illusion, as it was necessary and inevitable that you would currently have that state of mind, and it was necessary and inevitable before you were born. You never had any choice about it.
Ah, but I’ve taken ayahuasca, twice
That allows me to throw open the curtains of perception, and part the long bank holiday weekend clouds of quotidian determinism, so as to see the royal and shining sun of dazzling reality
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Many moons ago, I read a book (*) that dipped into this theological question. How can you maintain religion and faith as science explains more and more? If the Big Bang created the universe, where was God?
The answer, essentially, was "Who lit the Big Bang's fuse?'
There is always room for faith and belief in the unknown.
(*) Perhaps Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff', but probably misremembering.
IMO that's quite weak because it concedes a universe in which God is reduced to "the starter of the clockwork machine".
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
It’s an interesting piece. It also shows the relevance of “PB’s endless weather talk”
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
It'll keep pissing relentlessly until July, then there'll be an interlude during which we are nearly baked to death like we were two years ago, and then come September it'll start to relentlessly piss again until Summer 2025.
I think this is what climate change is going to look like in Britain. Wind and rain almost the entire year, punctuated by unbearable heatwaves. All that extra atmospheric energy has to go somewhere.
Looking on the bright side, today through to Sunday looks quite tolerable.
Shorts weather over the weekend if you're of a robust disposition.
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
Darwinian evolution is being challenged, however. Theories like inherited trauma - they are controversial but out there. It may turn out that Darwinian evolution is like Newtonian physics, a brilliant conception of the world that lasts for centuries and still provides an easy common sense model, but is actually and fundamentally wrong
No, it really isn't. The strong likelihood (close to scientific certainty) that some environmental challenges can cause changes in gene expression that can in some cases be heritable, doesn't really challenge the Darwinian theory.
Though it will substantially change the understanding of how it operates. And gives back a little respectability to Lamarckian ideas.
“Scientific certainty” lol
Heliocentrism was scientifically certain. Newtonian physics was scientifically certain. Phlogiston was scientifically certain. And all completely wrong
“Scientifically certain” is an oxymoron. Science is a process and a method, not an outcome. It is a perpetual motion machine of discovery, constantly disproving itself. What is certain and right today is certain to be wrong tomorrow, and nature is an Heraclitean fire
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
That Nature is a Heraclitean Fire and of the comfort of the Resurrection
BY GERARD MANLEY HOPKINS
Cloud-puffball, torn tufts, tossed pillows | flaunt forth, then chevy on an air- Built thoroughfare: heaven-roysterers, in gay-gangs | they throng; they glitter in marches. Down roughcast, down dazzling whitewash, | wherever an elm arches, Shivelights and shadowtackle ín long | lashes lace, lance, and pair. Delightfully the bright wind boisterous | ropes, wrestles, beats earth bare Of yestertempest's creases; | in pool and rut peel parches Squandering ooze to squeezed | dough, crust, dust; stanches, starches Squadroned masks and manmarks | treadmire toil there Footfretted in it. Million-fuelèd, | nature's bonfire burns on. But quench her bonniest, dearest | to her, her clearest-selvèd spark Man, how fast his firedint, | his mark on mind, is gone! Both are in an unfathomable, all is in an enormous dark Drowned. O pity and indig | nation! Manshape, that shone Sheer off, disseveral, a star, | death blots black out; nor mark Is any of him at all so stark But vastness blurs and time | beats level. Enough! the Resurrection, A heart's-clarion! Away grief's gasping, | joyless days, dejection. Across my foundering deck shone A beacon, an eternal beam. | Flesh fade, and mortal trash Fall to the residuary worm; | world's wildfire, leave but ash: In a flash, at a trumpet crash, I am all at once what Christ is, | since he was what I am, and This Jack, joke, poor potsherd, | patch, matchwood, immortal diamond, Is immortal diamond.
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
New: Labour are calling on Downing Street to rule out a mooted deal with Nigel Farage in which he would be made ambassador to Washington in exchange for him not standing for Reform in the election, saying this "could threaten international unity against Russian aggression".
(And very best wishes to those of us commemorating and celebrating Easter in their churches and chapels.)
Was Jesus a zombie?
Good heavens, what a thing to say!
*startled*
Doctrinally, I understand very much not.
The thing that annoys me about Easter is that we keep on getting told Jesus died for our sins, okay but he didn't stay dead right? So what exactly did he sacrifice?
Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins, not much of a sacrifice if you ask me.
He was resurrected with a whacking great hole in his side, give the guy a break! It was the shedding of blood on the cross that was the sacrifice - so that sinful man could enter the Kingdom of Heaven through faith in him and his sacrifice.
The Kingdom if Heaven must be a truly ghastly place. Generation upon generation of relatives you have no idea who they are or interest in, but you have to make polite smalltalk with for all eternity.
And I bet there's no real ale. Probably just Madri lager. At £6 a pint.
I cannot see how 'Heaven' is supposed to work. It's a place you're supposed to go and be permanently happy.
Take an aged relative of mine. She married fairly young, had kids, and then her husband died whilst their kids were young. She eventually remarried, and has been with her second husband for four or five decades.
So the first husband will (presumably!) be up there waiting for her. Which would be blooming boring. But when she turns up, there'll be a second husband coming along soon (if he doesn't die first - that would be awkward (*)). People are what would make Heaven for me - having some of the people I love around me (hopefully!). But what if they want to spend eternity with another love, or other friends?
I cannot see a way around this without theological hand-waving, or changing our characters in Heaven so we won't be 'us' any more, or having Heaven as a boring non-place.
Perhaps 'The Good Place' had the right idea...
(*) "Hi, I'm Matthew." "Hi, I'm Neil. I'm waiting for Joyce. I want to spend eternity with her." "Oh, so am I." "I'm not really into threesomes." "No, neither am I" Cue an eternity of awkwardness...
The chance of after death existence having a 'homo sapiens' aspect to it is pretty much zero I'd think or indeed any experiences being limited by our comprehension of how we live life on Earth. The cloud angel, country club view of heaven was invented by priests to control the actions of King and Cotter down here. That's if you believe in continuing existence. Which I personally do.
Then that provokes a bigger problem: it would not be 'me' up there, as I would have changed beyond all recognition.
Religion just makes life too complicated. For God to exist, everything we think we know scientifically has to go out of the window. He created the earth and everything on it so all the science we think we have about the big bang and evolution is a load of bollocks. I just can't get my head around it. I know personal incredulity is a fallacy, but it's where I'm at.
Organised religion and diktat from Rome and its equivalents has ruined faith, spirituality and the like. But science is very faith based too. 'Dark matter' 'strong nuclear force' 'unifying theory' etc Edit - Darwinian Evolution is definitely bollocks!
Evolution is bollocks? Are you sure??
Darwinian type Evolution. I believe that to be bollocks, yes. However I can't get into it now because I'm off to spend some good Friday time with Papa Woolie, be back later today! Have a nice day off all.
If it were not for the work of Mendel, evolutionary theory might well be considered bollocks today. But, Mendel and his successors more or less nailed how it worked.
Darwinian evolution is being challenged, however. Theories like inherited trauma - they are controversial but out there. It may turn out that Darwinian evolution is like Newtonian physics, a brilliant conception of the world that lasts for centuries and still provides an easy common sense model, but is actually and fundamentally wrong
No, it really isn't. The strong likelihood (close to scientific certainty) that some environmental challenges can cause changes in gene expression that can in some cases be heritable, doesn't really challenge the Darwinian theory.
Though it will substantially change the understanding of how it operates. And gives back a little respectability to Lamarckian ideas.
“Scientific certainty” lol
Heliocentrism was scientifically certain. Newtonian physics was scientifically certain. Phlogiston was scientifically certain. And all completely wrong
“Scientifically certain” is an oxymoron. Science is a process and a method, not an outcome. It is a perpetual motion machine of discovery, constantly disproving itself. What is certain and right today is certain to be wrong tomorrow, and nature is an Heraclitean fire
Newtonian physics is still a scientific certainty, albeit these days a subset of stuff by Einstein.
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
"31% of children under the age of 2 [in Gaza] are suffering from acute malnutrition, a percentage which has doubled since January"
Indeed, should also be remembered there are abour 3,000 Christians in Gaza too, they are not all Muslims, who also need aid and support (while Hamas needs to release its Israeli hostages0
Those who are indulging in a chocolate fest this Easter, punctuated perhaps with a little light discussion of the wisdom of Oxford dons Richard Dawkins or Nick Bostrom, might remember what is going on right now in the part of the world that a famous refugee called Jesus came from:
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
"31% of children under the age of 2 [in Gaza] are suffering from acute malnutrition, a percentage which has doubled since January"
Indeed, should also be remembered there are abour 3,000 Christians in Gaza too, they are not all Muslims, who also need aid and support (while Hamas needs to release its Israeli hostages0
“In a flash, at a trumpet crash, I am all at once what Christ is, | since he was what I am, and This Jack, joke, poor potsherd, | patch, matchwood, immortal diamond, Is immortal diamond.”
…. Might be the single best closing line in the history of English verse
Also, Hopkins sounds weirdly like good AI
Also also, that’s a perfect poem for Good Friday. Happy Oestre
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
And we appear to be hard-wired so that (a) we can never know one way or another but (b) we just can't stop speculating about it. The human condition is a bugger.
Comments
Although you're missing a keyword, its beyond our comprehension yet.
The whole point of science is to expand our comprehension over time.
But the first scientific principle is to realise there are things that you don't understand, and to be willing to be sceptical, question and challenge assumptions.
There is nothing scientific about blind, unquestioning faith.
Pretty low, I’d say. We’ve done well with what we’ve got but the fact our basic understanding of the universe keeps dramatically altering - dark matter, no dark matter, universe no multiverse, no wait it’s a simulation - suggests to me that we are finally butting up against the limits of our understanding
Fortunately we are about to create a superior and immortal intelligence. AGI then ASI. Self improving ASI might have a chance at understanding everything, then it will try and explain it to us, using really short words
It's a type of black magic although admittedly that might with justification be considered an insult to magic.
Many find it safe to take refuge in science because few ever have a go at it.
Science is not simplistic or partial or a part of the story. As a cosmology it's plain wrong.
I don't want a cosmology based on 2+2=4 or even F=G(m_1)m_2/r^2.
What does it mean to know something scientifically? What's the essential difference from saying you know the thing Enlilically?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlil
Put "science" in Germanic rather than Romance and "I know something really knowistically" doesn't sound so appealing.
Here is a test that anyone can use to check how much they rely on the holy notion of "science": they should rephrase what they're saying without using the words "science", "scientist", "scientific", while realising that they are not being deprived of something or humiliated - they are being helped.
But the evidence points back to an originating cause, with a beginning to time and the causal sequence - the Big Bang. It isn't feasible for empirical method to go further than this; but it renders at least doubtful the idea that there are no non-empirical reasons or non causal explanations for things.
*Whoever they might be.
What your Easter Sunday lunch says about the dire state of modern Britain
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/news/easter-sunday-farmers-state-of-britain-lamb-eggs-hot-cross/
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/datasets/wintercoronaviruscovid19infectionstudyenglandandscotland
The weather has been crap. It’s been so crap it is now imperilling British agriculture
“It has, it would be fair to say, been a shocking year for British potatoes. There have been Sundays in this first chunk of the year when finding a bag of Maris Pipers has been nigh on impossible. Other varieties of white potato might be available, but they don’t always match up to the satisfyingly dry crunch and fluffy texture of a Maris. “It was an unbelievably difficult growing season last year,” says Richard Arundel, founder of the AKP Group, one of our biggest potato suppliers. “From a cold, wet, late Spring which resulted in a reduction in yield over the season, and then ran into horrendous wet weather at the traditional harvest period of September/October.” “
If this continues - and the forecasts are bad - this is going to become a major issue
https://www.youtube.com/live/FKT5lOFJjzA?si=dXlJMPMk2TJeqipR
If we are having a wide definition of real ale then maybe I need to put in some specific requests. Firstly it has to be hand pulled, not gas aided and not bottled or from cans.
If I can make some specific requests I would like Shere Drop and Southwold bitter in the summer and Broadside in the winter. That is assuming there are seasons in heaven.
Is that too much to ask?
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1773453083244183605
Yesterday, Rishi gave a knighthood to Philip Davies MP (aka Mr Esther McVey) for services to saying nice things about the Prime Minister on GB News.
(That's why the demographic profile of the population isn't as important as most think. You only die once, after all. There will be a small increase in end-of-life care in the 2030s as the Boomers die but that's it).
- under the old rules Davies bought a flat and was able to claim the mortgage expenses
- Then the rules changed and he was no longer able to claim the expenses
- He could not afford to pay the mortgage himself
- Therefore he had two choices: (a) sell the flat, repay the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses; or (b) keep the flat, rent it out to cover the mortgage and live in a rented flat paid for by expenses
He chose option (b)
Can you explain what your concern is? He seems - based on reading one Guardian article - to have behaved quite properly.
Farmers must be in despair
Indeed on the latest Holyrood poll from Redfield and Wilton Scottish Labour will end up as joint largest party in 2026 with 42 MSPs each. However as there would be more LD MSPs than Green who would almost certainly vote for Sarwar and the SCons would likely abstain, Sarwar would become FM.
So we would likely have a UK Labour PM and Labour FMs in Wales and Scotland again for the first time since the Blair years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Scottish_Parliament_election
https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2021s&cSNP=35&cCON=18&cLAB=31&cLD=5&rSNP=28&rCON=16&rLAB=29&rGRN=9&rLD=9&rALBA=3&rAFU=0#Scotland
(warning: horrible video showing malnourished children)
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/3/27/videos-of-malnourished-children-show-gazas-forced-starvation-crisis
"31% of children under the age of 2 [in Gaza] are suffering from acute malnutrition, a percentage which has doubled since January"
"I don't want to scare anyone, but war is no longer a concept from the past," he told European media. "It's real and it started over two years ago.""
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68692195
The “nice sunny Easter” that @Anabobazina was promising has turned into this. Two hours of chilly sun this afternoon, then grey cool and a bit wet throughout
Happy Eastertide! Time for coffee
Potentially by a substantial amount of money.
But given the net public benefit, I don't see the problem.
Take it.
Dubbed 'Invisible Ink,' Alethea reports on Russia's increased sophistication in disinformation campaigns, and the network itself signals a shift in Russia's information operations objectives
https://www.alethea.com/post/writing-with-invisible-ink
Russia has a new TwiX amplification technique, and more interestingly, its main aim has changed from sowing discord to undermining support for Ukraine, especially in America. There is no specific mention of weekly visits to pb.
iuxta Crucem lacrimosa,
dum pendebat Filius.
Cuius animam gementem,
contristatam et dolentem
pertransivit gladius.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let's_Go_to_Golgotha!
Mohamed Mansour: Rishi Sunak faces criticism after Tory donor given knighthood
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68686662
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
Also it’s gonna be overcast til Tuesday
I think this is what climate change is going to look like in Britain. Wind and rain almost the entire year, punctuated by unbearable heatwaves. All that extra atmospheric energy has to go somewhere.
Looking on the bright side, today through to Sunday looks quite tolerable.
https://www.tiktok.com/@sebastianvoltmer/video/7348905909390691616
https://x.com/peterwalker99/status/1773675901332357133
What an utter shambles the Tory Party is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9533613,-3.1795778,3a,75y,316.7h,88.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3r4Y8xbQTycuu6Pwpw-pnQ!2e0!6shttps://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid=3r4Y8xbQTycuu6Pwpw-pnQ&cb_client=maps_sv.tactile.gps&w=203&h=100&yaw=129.88037&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/two-thirds-prefer-britain-remain-monarchy
The strong likelihood (close to scientific certainty) that some environmental challenges can cause changes in gene expression that can in some cases be heritable, doesn't really challenge the Darwinian theory.
Though it will substantially change the understanding of how it operates. And gives back a little respectability to Lamarckian ideas.
That said Tory PMs have form for sending appeasers to Washington.
That allows me to throw open the curtains of perception, and part the long bank holiday weekend clouds of quotidian determinism, so as to see the royal and shining sun of dazzling reality
You’ll just have to take it on trust
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
And Nothing Nowhere? I thought you were an O2 fan.
A rat done bit my sister Nell
(And UFO on the moon)...
Heliocentrism was scientifically certain. Newtonian physics was scientifically certain. Phlogiston was scientifically certain. And all completely wrong
“Scientifically certain” is an oxymoron. Science is a process and a method, not an outcome. It is a perpetual motion machine of discovery, constantly disproving itself. What is certain and right today is certain to be wrong tomorrow, and nature is an Heraclitean fire
BY GERARD MANLEY HOPKINS
Cloud-puffball, torn tufts, tossed pillows | flaunt forth, then chevy on an air-
Built thoroughfare: heaven-roysterers, in gay-gangs | they throng; they glitter in marches.
Down roughcast, down dazzling whitewash, | wherever an elm arches,
Shivelights and shadowtackle ín long | lashes lace, lance, and pair.
Delightfully the bright wind boisterous | ropes, wrestles, beats earth bare
Of yestertempest's creases; | in pool and rut peel parches
Squandering ooze to squeezed | dough, crust, dust; stanches, starches
Squadroned masks and manmarks | treadmire toil there
Footfretted in it. Million-fuelèd, | nature's bonfire burns on.
But quench her bonniest, dearest | to her, her clearest-selvèd spark
Man, how fast his firedint, | his mark on mind, is gone!
Both are in an unfathomable, all is in an enormous dark
Drowned. O pity and indig | nation! Manshape, that shone
Sheer off, disseveral, a star, | death blots black out; nor mark
Is any of him at all so stark
But vastness blurs and time | beats level. Enough! the Resurrection,
A heart's-clarion! Away grief's gasping, | joyless days, dejection.
Across my foundering deck shone
A beacon, an eternal beam. | Flesh fade, and mortal trash
Fall to the residuary worm; | world's wildfire, leave but ash:
In a flash, at a trumpet crash,
I am all at once what Christ is, | since he was what I am, and
This Jack, joke, poor potsherd, | patch, matchwood, immortal diamond,
Is immortal diamond.
Hopkins on peak mid season form, there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2dpq4sExgs
happy days.
( Not that, as far as I know, Rishi and Nigel are related). Perhaps they share the same bank . or perhaps not.
I still have an o2 sim in the phone if you look closely, I also have a Three eSIM too.
o2 has been unusable in central Manchester for years.
This is what I get in central Manchester with EE and elsewhere.
I am all at once what Christ is, | since he was what I am, and
This Jack, joke, poor potsherd, | patch, matchwood, immortal diamond,
Is immortal diamond.”
…. Might be the single best closing line in the history of English verse
Also, Hopkins sounds weirdly like good AI
Also also, that’s a perfect poem for Good Friday. Happy Oestre