Login now

Not your profile? Login and get free access to your reports and analysis.

Tags

Sign in

No tag added here yet.
You can login on CircleCount to add some tags here.

Are you missing a tag in the list of available tags? You can suggest new tags here.

Login now

Do you want to see a more detailed chart? Check your settings and define your favorite chart type.

Or click here to get the detailed chart only once.

Daniel Voisin has been at 1 events

HostFollowersTitleDateGuestsLinks
Google+7,747,547The Google+ team will be sharing a few updates. RSVP to this event to watch the broadcast live.A Morning with Google+2013-10-29 17:30:0034218 

Daniel Voisin has been shared in 43 public circles

AuthorFollowersDateUsers in CircleCommentsReshares+1Links
Tarık Bulut238#growthcircle   #circleshare   This is my 21st circle share of this circle and I hope to get over 400+ shares and continue to grow this as time goes on.  This should increase Google Plus comments and plus ones.  This is a circle I created a few months ago and am now sharing with you in hopes that we can all benefit and grow our online presence.  This circle rewards those who take part in interaction as seen below..  #GrowthCircle   For all you SEO and social media marketing needs visit my company  #bosmol #BosmolCircle   #GrowthCIrcle     #GooglePlus   #CircleShare   #sharedpubliccircles   #sharedcircles   #circlesharing   #circleshared   #publiccirclesproject   #publicsharedcircles   #circleoftheday   #google   #circle #circles #publiccircle #sharedcircles   #sharedcircle #morefollowers #sharingcircles #circleshare #sharedpubliccircles #sharedpublicircles   #sharedcircle #AddCircle #FindCircles #addcircle   #circlemeup #circlesdiscovery 2014-07-02 14:40:215015816
Tarık Bulut238Free google Plus FollowersTo be added to the Circle you have to do these simple steps:1 - include me in your circles2 - Click add people and create your circle3 - share the circle (include yourself)4 - add +1 to the post______________________________________ #CircleSharing #Circle#Share#CircleOfTheDay#ShareCircle#Google+#ADD#SharedPublicCircles#Google#SharedCircles#Friends#GooglePlusTips#SocialMedia#AddCircle#Marketing#SocialMediaMarketing#Engagers#AddPeople#PublicSharedCircles#teamelitecircle2014-07-02 12:08:3430010712
Tarık Bulut78 #growthcircle   #circleshare   This is my 21st circle share of this circle and I hope to get over 400+ shares and continue to grow this as time goes on.  This should increase Google Plus comments and plus ones.  This is a circle I created a few months ago and am now sharing with you in hopes that we can all benefit and grow our online presence.  This circle rewards those who take part in interaction as seen below..  #GrowthCircle   For all you SEO and social media marketing needs visit my company  #bosmol #BosmolCircle   #GrowthCIrcle     #GooglePlus   #CircleShare   #sharedpubliccircles   #sharedcircles   #circlesharing   #circleshared   #publiccirclesproject   #publicsharedcircles   #circleoftheday   #google   #circle #circles #publiccircle #sharedcircles   #sharedcircle #morefollowers #sharingcircles #circleshare #sharedpubliccircles #sharedpublicircles   #sharedcircle #AddCircle #FindCircles #addcircle   #circlemeup #circlesdiscovery 2014-07-01 19:46:105015510
michael Addi0If you're receiving this notification then you are in this circle!6/27/2014This circle has a great group of active users on G+, they also share some great content as well.  #circleshare  If you'd like to stay included in this circle, then I ask you to please share this original post.If you want to be excluded, please let me know and you will no longer be included.2014-06-27 18:04:52385112
Moan Lisa34,675Moan Lisa's All Kinds of People Shared Circle27 June, 2014RESHARE if you want to be includedmoanlisa.org2014-06-27 10:54:53299106113155
Tessa Schlesinger20,569This is the circle of people I follow. I am not in it (so I'm not promoting myself). I follow them because they are interesting, sincere, have good stuff. Some of them have been here with me from day one.  They don't always interact every day, but I think it really depends on what you're looking for on G+. If you want people to interact with you, well, nobody can interact with everybody who adds them. There just isn't enough time to do that. On the other hand, if you'd like to read someone because they present informative, interesting, entertaining stuff, then this circle is interesting. I think it would appeal to atheists, agnostics, people who love beauty, travel, occasional humor, who are visual, intellectual, thinkers, humanist, and/or liberal. :)2014-05-08 15:31:52186503
Shashi S5,567Circle of Great Engagers________________________There is no doubt this is one of the most powerful group of engager's who will make your time of exploring worthwhile in Google Plus. Share and enjoy...Sorry if I missed anyone. Please comment I'll include you in the next shared circle. :)Also, This is a Great Circle and includes Google+   #TopEngagers : really interesting and active people on Google Plus to add in your circles.Top Google+ users that share unique and original contents.Follow this advice and grow your G+ community with people that share amazing content that will surprise you:Boost your visibility on Google+ - Share the circle!To be added to the Circle you have to do these simple steps:1 - include me in your circles2 - share the circle (include yourself) *3 - add +1 to the post4 - *Start something new and share with the world of google plusMore you share more you get!__Shashiॐ नमः शिवायOm Namah Shivaya#circles   #circleshare   #circlesharing   #sharedcircles #Friday #sharingcircles   #sharedpubliccircles   #sharedcircleoftheday #circlesunday   #share   #shared   #followers   #addcircles #publicsharedcircles   #share   #addpeople   #addcircle #addfriends   #circle   #empireavenue   #socialmedia     #influencers   #influencer   #influence   #influencermarketing #sundaycircle  2014-04-11 10:40:52294211430
Ole Olson38,548٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶If you're looking for some of the BEST engagers on Google+, this is it.Top notch commentary, good content support, and some out of this world posts to boot. =========================================I sculpted this circle personally over the last year, and this is it's first full release. The Top Engagers is guaranteed to make your G+ experience better. =========================================    #publicsharedcircles       #publiccircle       #circle         #circles    #thebigcommunity   #kingcircle #topcircleshare   #awesome       #awesomepeople       #shareyourcircle    #circleoftheday         #circleshare       #circlesharing           #sharedcircles       #sharedpubliccircles     #sharedcircleoftheday  2014-01-27 09:48:552507811
Nina Pelletier16,409Thought today would be a good day to share my Canadian Circle .  Some of the very best Canucks are right here on G+ with us :)2014-01-25 19:12:58471215
Ole Olson20,256Top Circlers on the GooglesphereI've been sharing one and only one circle per day lately, picking the most interesting ones I've found. My goal is to share a diverse selection of circles, some based on topics like the environment, or interests like scifi, or well designed share circles. Probably about time I share one of my OWN circles for a change!Below is my recently updated Top Circles circle. These folks have a good track record of forging excellent share circles. Add them immediately.  #HashtagZoo  (concept courtesy of +Peter Edenist) #Circles   #Sharedcircles   #PublicCircles   #topcircles   #circlequeen   #circlemaster   #SharingIsCaring  2013-08-15 08:12:489515921
Shawna Mac22,734Canadian Circle Share - Evening EditionHappy Friday!  Last week there were a few Canadian circle shares and I was circled by a bunch of new Canucks, so I'm sharing mine this week as it is brimming with fresh, active Canadians and will help those new to G+ get some great content in their streams.  Slight emphasis on Nova Scotians mebbe.If you are a Canadian or a new circler and want me to add you, please comment below and I shall be happy to do so (but please have your about me filled out with something other than Viagra ads!)I <3 my Canadians (and I'm notifying you so you know where all the new people are coming from)#Canada #Canadiana #NovaScotia #circleshare #circlesharefriday2013-05-11 00:08:59501281020
Ole Olson13,134My Top Circler CircleSpecial thanks to these people on G+ who have shared me in one of their circles. I don't say it very often, but I really do appreciate it.  As I went over the list on +CircleCount last night, I realized some of these folks had vanished from my own circles, which happens on G+ occasionally, but that has been rectified. These are all fine folks with an eclectic mix of quality posts. Add this circle for some outstanding engagers.   And for others, sculpting quality circles and SHARING them is a very important part to G+. Don't share a circle every day, but do it once in a while to help others find who is important to you on here. Dirk TalamascaAndrey MashnichJack C CrawfordCircleCountEuro MaestroSusanne RamharterMark SDaniel HarringtonPaul MeulmanRandy HilarskiJUSTIN MATTHEW (shouting!)Gideon RosenblattTrever McGheeArmando LiossMike ClancyJohn HardyRob SalzmanJason Hurtado DanielsAlister MacintyreTina ValeJohn KelldenBob MulhollandDaniel SandsteinJari HuomoGabriel FitzpatrickGiovanni TotaroRae OuztsDaniele VegaMelissa WalkerKimberly CrawleyShaun WheldenRichard Greenjohn sawyerWes ForsterMarko Shiva PavlovicWataru TengaDavid BeeAtheismJohn DoeMelisa BeliwiczErik BarrettAmy McLeodAaron StanleyJeffrey HarringtonJason MDaniel VoisinBill SewardAndrew HartwellJoys Maclaurinmatt vovakiss #CircleShare   #SharedCircles   #SharedPublicCircles   #CircleOfTheDay   #Engagers  2013-04-23 13:27:015013615
Bob Mulholland12,616Inform | Act | Share | Stay Aware #InformActShareStayAware  #InternetFreedom   #SharedCircle  *Part 1 of 2*With the impending #Anonymous  day of action tomorrow #PM2012 , here's a Circle of people who care about internet freedom.+1 or share to be added.2012-12-20 18:51:28490916
Trever McGhee17,563+Take2seconds to check out this circle of amazing people made up of great Artists and Art lovers that +Nicolas Green has found, along with some other extraordinary people that I've added that share inspiring posts.+Take2seconds today and everyday to click the +1...the share button on positive posts that make you smile, for it's guaranteed to make someone else smile as well when you share it on the public stream.Share circles of people that are making a difference with their posts, with their shares.+Nothing but Circles +CircleCount  #SharedCircles   +Best Shared Circle    #circle   #share   #publiccircle   +Public Circles 2012-12-20 17:58:02444512237
Bob Mulholland12,239#InternetFreedom   #SharedCircle  [Part 1 of 2]+1 to be added. I don't notify anymore, but all #InternetFreedom  related posts have this added:Inform | Act | Share | Stay Aware #InformActShareStayAware 2012-12-04 15:15:2349251011
Brian Buckley0Sharing my first group of awesome Canadians. I had to cap it at <500 so I could share. My next post will be the second smaller circle that has grown out of folks who connected after I shared the first one. Are you a Canadian want to be to be added? Send me a comment, +1, or circle me.2012-10-28 17:16:3449110111
Brian Buckley0Here is my circle of amazing Canadian plussers. I actually have 521 but G+ has limited the share to 500. I'll meed to split it into 2 groups. If you're not in this circle and would like to be comment and I'll add you into one of my two circles - If you are in fact Canadian. Be awesome if you want to re-share. You may be one of the 21 G+ cut out.2012-10-13 17:20:45500736
Anna Mannino2,231Whether you have told me you write, or you participated in #NaNoWriMo last year, this is my circle of writers. Strangely only 500 people can be shared at a time, so this is only most of you.If you'd like to be in my writers circle, let me know. I mostly post around and about NaNoWriMo stuff. I try to also do a lot of hangouts to help those who need the support of a local meetup but can't make their local meetups for whatever reason, or just prefer talking to strangers on the internet as opposed to strangers in a coffee house. (Whatever, I don't judge).2012-10-02 04:30:31501501
Bob Mulholland9,885#InternetFreedom #CircleShare #SharedCircles  Part 1 of 2+1 the post to be included, +1 my first comment to also be notified (although these types of posts are becoming less and less common)2012-10-01 02:46:474983213
Alister Macintyre9,520Here is my circle of people who like to (and have demonstrated capability of) having a civilized conversation about Current Events from a Progressive point of view.2012-09-11 06:05:57252533
Zachary Roovenback1,335Sharing my Atheist and Fellow Freethinkers circle again.  Almost 1,800 strong.  You can only add 500 a day, so let me know if you need it shared again.Stay thinking, my friends.2012-08-10 04:29:445016310
David Waddington2,256An updated Canadian's on Google+ circle.Feel free to share.If you are a Canadian and would like to be added to this circle just make a comment. When I plus 1 your comment you have been added.These are not just photographers. This is a mix of many interests.2012-07-27 23:54:124301015
Bob Mulholland7,562Sorry it's been a couple weeks, but Melissa is going to have the baby any day now and my focus now needs to be offline most of the time.After Zane has been born, my posts will become regular again.#InternetFreedom   #CircleShare  [part 1 of 2]Inform | Act | Share | Stay Aware+1 if you want in+1 my first comment if you also want notifications. #InformActShareStayAware  2012-07-17 17:15:194947211
David Waddington2,233I am sharing my circle for Canadians that are on Google+I try to add as many as I can. If you are not in this circle and wish to be added just make a comment. If your comment gets plus 1'd by me then you have been added. I will share this circle again at a later date with new additions.I also have a circle for users in Edmonton. If you are in Edmonton and wish to be added just note in your comment that you are in Edmonton.  I have added quite a few users from Edmonton in the last while. One thing I have noticed is many haven't filled out their profile. If you wish to have people follow you it's a good idea to fill out a profile and put it in why people might be interested in following you.Lets grow our circles!  :) #circleshare #circles #circlesharing #circleshared  2012-07-16 00:35:063512004
Bob Mulholland5,392Do you want to #StopCISPA ?So do these people. This is my Internet Freedom Circle. If you aren't in this Circle but should be, click +1 and I'll add you to it.If you also want to be notified when important posts regarding Internet Freedom are shared, click +1 on my first comment. (no more than 5 per day, usually only one or two)Edit: Sorry, I got distracted by something shiny and forgot to comment. Look for comment number 6 or 7.2012-04-20 13:46:4424022627
Bob Mulholland5,230Inform | Act | Share | Stay AwareIt's a little late this week, but here's this week's share of my Internet Freedom Circle. You know the drill by now, folks:If you're not already here and you want to be added to this Circle, click +1 on either of the first two comments. UPDATED: Oopsie! I got distracted by a funny picture and forgot to make the comments, so look for comments 6 and 7[clicking +1 on the main post does not automatically get you included in the Circle]2012-04-17 12:58:24228709
Mike Norton2,517SWTOR Circle ShareWe are a bit overdue for a SWTOR Circle share. So here it is :)Please be sure to mention in your profile somewhere you play SWTOR to help others circle you back.Please reshare.2012-04-13 14:35:23500312
Mark Gesswein3,076Maybe this #sharedcircle already came across your way. Otherwise I recommend to take a closer look at it, cause you will find some inspiring people. Of course you can also simply follow the whole circle :-)Happy Easter!#sharedcircles #HighQualitySharingPeopleOfG+2012-04-09 14:56:14164223
Marc Jansen17,871Sharing the LoveI freely admit that +Bearman Cartoons came up with this idea first (Hell, I'd better own up to that, considering that I publicly proclaimed my desire to steal borrow this idea on his thread!)This circle is made up of all of the people who've included me in very nearly 150 publicly-shared circles, as captured by +CircleCount.com.There are, or course, a lot of the Usual Suspects here, people like +Peter G McDermott , +Michael Anderson, +stephanie wanamaker , and +Eoghann Irving.What I found most enlightening is that fact that I actually found a handful of names that I didn't recognize here. People who have apparently taken some level interest in me without me even realizing it. People like +Fred Wierda, +Nate Smith, +tam frager, and +Zach Harper, to name a few.I just wanted to follow +Bearman Cartoons lead and thank each of these people and to repay the favor. THIS JUST IN: It seems that I missed +Shay Dougan and +Kevin Medeiros when I put this together - my apologies to both of you for the oversight!(Oh, and lest anyone cares to give me a hard time for adding myself, +CircleCount tells me that I somehow managed to share myself out at least once... ;-) )2012-03-24 03:37:2075717
Shane Pitre2,308Canadian 1 - is now full!Starting a Canadian 2 Circle.If you're Canadian, and you're awesome, and you want to be hooped; +1, comment, share, kick me, whatever.My goal is to see how many Canadians we can get in shared circles.Please make sure your profile is filled out+Shared Circles on G+ #sharedcircles #circleshare #canada #canadian2012-03-13 23:19:04501101118
Shane Pitre2,172CanadiansIf you're Canadian, and you're awesome, and you want to be hooped; +1, comment, share, kick me, whatever.My goal is to see how many Canadians we can get in shared circles.Please make sure your profile is filled out+Shared Circles on G+ #canada #canadian #sharedcircles2012-03-11 16:30:414399910
Mike Norton2,353SWTOR Circle Share 2 of 2Please share these circles of awesome people who play or follow Star Wars the Old Republic. Also please help others who discover you by putting somewhere in your profile that you are interested in SWTOR.2012-02-01 02:47:09376003
Mike Norton2,227SWTOR Circle Share 2 of 2Please put somewhere on your profile that you are interested in SWTOR so everyone knows what circle to put you in.2012-01-17 15:01:13364000
Mike Norton2,060SWTOR Circle Share Circle 2 of 2 of the main circle.Please add SWTOR somewhere to your profile so others will know where to add you when they come looking :)2011-12-29 15:14:05319000
Mike Norton1,943SWTOR Circle Share 2 of 2This is the main SWTOR Circle.Please put somewhere in your profile that you are interested about SWTOR or TOR so people will know where to put you.2011-12-13 18:09:00284410
Daniel Voisin45This is half my atheist circle. Enjoy the conversation and share about!2011-12-10 14:50:335011712
Mike Norton1,896SWTOR Circle Share 2 of 2Please be kind and add SWTOR or TOR somewhere on your profile so others know to add you.2011-12-09 14:29:38240100
Mike Norton1,871SWTOR Circle Share 2 of 2Please help others re-circle you by putting SWTOR somewhere in your profile.2011-12-06 18:08:04215001
Wataru Tenga0Latest Progressive Politics circle2011-11-12 11:51:482281132
Anna Mannino (GoNoAMMo)213This is my current count of the NaNoWriMo challengers this year. I know there are more of you!Remember, there will be an ongoing Google+ hangout the entire month, as well as live streaming, you can pop in and out as needed and get a support group for your Novel no matter what you're writing about!Let me know if you would like to be added in. ^_^Anna Mannino shared a circle with you.2011-10-30 20:54:004541843
Michael Jacobs0Mike Norton's "Starwars circle"Michael Jacobs shared a circle with you.2011-10-27 21:14:434541317
Wataru Tenga0Progressive PoliticsWataru Tenga shared a circle with you.2011-10-27 11:34:351761439
Mike Norton1,079Updated SWTOR Circle share. Pass it on and update it with your SWTOR circle.Mike Norton shared a circle with you.2011-10-20 14:09:38455201

Activity

Average numbers for the latest posts (max. 50 posts, posted within the last 4 weeks)

5
comments per post
1
reshares per post
3
+1's per post

1,219
characters per posting

Top posts in the last 50 posts

Most comments: 59

posted image

2014-08-21 17:00:05 (59 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

Interested in opinions from Muslims on this rather lengthy article. While the author is being critical of Islam in parts, I do think it's a fair and rational criticism, not the typical fear mongering we often see from Western intellectuals.

Here's a selection from the conclusion:

Instead of permitting the leaders of ISIS to label everyone else a heretic, where are the authoritative voices of Muslim leaders that declare for everyone to hear that the era of the caliphs is over. That Islam is a faith, an expression of a belief in God and his sovereignty, and in the prophet who ended the brutality of the tribes and who called Allah compassionate and merciful: “Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.”(Qur’an, 5:32) That Islam stands for discovery, and literature andscienti... more »

Most reshares: 6

posted image

2014-08-30 17:32:03 (2 comments, 6 reshares, 8 +1s) 

I tend to go on a rambling tangent when I first wake up. It goes well with my coffee. Today's:

A belief is a proposition held to be true by the person professing it. How true or right that proposition is is irrelevant.

A proposition is a statement that expresses an opinion. The truth of that opinion is again irrelevant.

A few examples:

Mars is a planet.
Capitalism is a good social system.
The earth is six thousand years old.

Each of these is a belief. Where they differ is in how justified each one is and how whether we can consider it fact or opinion.

In the first example we have lots of direct solid evidence. We can see Mars, we can go to Mars, we can measure Mars, and we can confidently say it's a fact Mars is a planet.

In the second example we have lots of evidence to suggest capitalism is a good... more »

Most plusones: 17

posted image

2014-08-18 23:58:25 (0 comments, 3 reshares, 17 +1s) 

It's a sign !

Latest 50 posts

posted image

2014-09-16 11:34:42 (3 comments, 1 reshares, 1 +1s) 

I know many people will say things like atheists are not by default rational or needn't be. They'll defend the freedom of atheists to think, do, and say what they want.

But if we are to constantly criticise Islam and Christianity for all the negative things those ideologies have inspired, put blame at their inability to see reality because of their baseless devotion to theistic ideals, then we'd better do the same when it's atheism inspiring abuse and injustice. 

I know many people will say things like atheists are not by default rational or needn't be. They'll defend the freedom of atheists to think, do, and say what they want.

But if we are to constantly criticise Islam and Christianity for all the negative things those ideologies have inspired, put blame at their inability to see reality because of their baseless devotion to theistic ideals, then we'd better do the same when it's atheism inspiring abuse and injustice. ___

posted image

2014-09-16 11:33:56 (0 comments, 2 reshares, 0 +1s) 

I know many people will say things like atheists are not by default rational or needn't be. They'll defend the freedom of atheists to think, do, and say what they want.

But if we are to constantly criticise Islam and Christianity for all the negative things those ideologies have inspired, put blame at their inability to see reality because of their baseless devotion to theistic ideals, then we'd better do the same when it's atheism inspiring abuse and injustice. 

I know many people will say things like atheists are not by default rational or needn't be. They'll defend the freedom of atheists to think, do, and say what they want.

But if we are to constantly criticise Islam and Christianity for all the negative things those ideologies have inspired, put blame at their inability to see reality because of their baseless devotion to theistic ideals, then we'd better do the same when it's atheism inspiring abuse and injustice. ___

2014-09-16 11:10:05 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

The creator of Minecraft, Notch, has decided to sell Minecraft to Microsoft, and to leave the company.  His explanation, below, is very interesting:

"I don’t see myself as a real game developer. I make games because it’s fun, and because I love games and I love to program, but I don’t make games with the intention of them becoming huge hits, and I don’t try to change the world. Minecraft certainly became a huge hit, and people are telling me it’s changed games. I never meant for it to do either. It’s certainly flattering, and to gradually get thrust into some kind of public spotlight is interesting.

A relatively long time ago, I decided to step down from Minecraft development. Jens was the perfect person to take over leading it, and I wanted to try to do new things. At first, I failed by trying to make something big again, but since I decided to just stick to smallprototypes a... more »

The creator of Minecraft, Notch, has decided to sell Minecraft to Microsoft, and to leave the company.  His explanation, below, is very interesting:

"I don’t see myself as a real game developer. I make games because it’s fun, and because I love games and I love to program, but I don’t make games with the intention of them becoming huge hits, and I don’t try to change the world. Minecraft certainly became a huge hit, and people are telling me it’s changed games. I never meant for it to do either. It’s certainly flattering, and to gradually get thrust into some kind of public spotlight is interesting.

A relatively long time ago, I decided to step down from Minecraft development. Jens was the perfect person to take over leading it, and I wanted to try to do new things. At first, I failed by trying to make something big again, but since I decided to just stick to small prototypes and interesting challenges, I’ve had so much fun with work. I wasn’t exactly sure how I fit into Mojang where people did actual work, but since people said I was important for the culture, I stayed.

I was at home with a bad cold a couple of weeks ago when the internet exploded with hate against me over some kind of EULA situation that I had nothing to do with. I was confused. I didn’t understand. I tweeted this in frustration. Later on, I watched the This is Phil Fish video on YouTube and started to realize I didn’t have the connection to my fans I thought I had. I’ve become a symbol. I don’t want to be a symbol, responsible for something huge that I don’t understand, that I don’t want to work on, that keeps coming back to me. I’m not an entrepreneur. I’m not a CEO. I’m a nerdy computer programmer who likes to have opinions on Twitter.

As soon as this deal is finalized, I will leave Mojang and go back to doing Ludum Dares and small web experiments. If I ever accidentally make something that seems to gain traction, I’ll probably abandon it immediately.

Considering the public image of me already is a bit skewed, I don’t expect to get away from negative comments by doing this, but at least now I won’t feel a responsibility to read them.

I’m aware this goes against a lot of what I’ve said in public. I have no good response to that. I’m also aware a lot of you were using me as a symbol of some perceived struggle. I’m not. I’m a person, and I’m right there struggling with you.

I love you. All of you. Thank you for turning Minecraft into what it has become, but there are too many of you, and I can’t be responsible for something this big. In one sense, it belongs to Microsoft now. In a much bigger sense, it’s belonged to all of you for a long time, and that will never change.

It’s not about the money. It’s about my sanity."___

posted image

2014-09-16 10:35:58 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Europe threatens World Peace... Again. 

Europe is a geopolitical Nationalist earthquake - and we're only starting to feel the shocks:

Across the continent Nationalism is on the rise: France, Russia, Scotland & UK, Greece, Spain and even Germany. The reasons are mixed but most of the anger has to do with the fallout from the 2007 financial crisis - Western mainstream parties have lost been left poorer, weakened and distracted, and far-right parties have filled the void.

The most immediate crisis in Europe is Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Russia is now a fascist country - invading its neighbours under the pretext that they are Russian speakers is something Hitler pulled off numerous times. And now NATO is delivering weapons to Ukraine to fight "pro-Russian Separatists". Make no mistake about the consequences of the rise of a... more »

Europe threatens World Peace... Again. 

Europe is a geopolitical Nationalist earthquake - and we're only starting to feel the shocks:

Across the continent Nationalism is on the rise: France, Russia, Scotland & UK, Greece, Spain and even Germany. The reasons are mixed but most of the anger has to do with the fallout from the 2007 financial crisis - Western mainstream parties have lost been left poorer, weakened and distracted, and far-right parties have filled the void.

The most immediate crisis in Europe is Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Russia is now a fascist country - invading its neighbours under the pretext that they are Russian speakers is something Hitler pulled off numerous times. And now NATO is delivering weapons to Ukraine to fight "pro-Russian Separatists". Make no mistake about the consequences of the rise of a far-right Russia and a weakened Europe - this is war in Europe.

Scotland will vote this week on whether to be independent from the UK. Judging by polls - the vote is on a knife-edge. As the Guardian newspaper has stated, whatever peoples personal reasons, this is about the rise of a Nationalist party. If Scotland votes to leave the UK  -it will cripple one of the world's major economic and military powers with a lasting global impact. Even if the Scots vote to stay, the UK is internally distracted and divided.

Then there's France. Everyone seems to be ignoring the rise of a fascist party at the heart of Europe. In the latest poll, Le Pen, leader of the National Front, could become President. Firstly, she wants to take France out of the Euro - which would create economic chaos. But a fascist government at the heart of Europe would threaten the entire European project as trade, politics, immigration and much more would be sanctioned by the rest of the continent. Again, even if Le Pen does not take the Presidency in 2017, France will be divided, distracted and its politics will lurch to the far-right.

Similar situations are being played out in Greece - where Fascists have already been voted into government; Catalonia wants to hold its own referendum on Independence from Spain later this year; the UK may hold a referendum on whether it stays in the EU, and the majority of Europeans want out of the Euro project.

What does this mean for Europe and the rest of the world?

- Europe is one of the largest and most important economic regions in the world. The politicians - including Germany's President Merkel - seem to have taken none of the necessary steps to insure the Euro's survival in the few years of breathing space given by European Central Banker, Mario Draghi. Germany's productivity has slowed and the rest of the EU is still in recession. A shock, such as a spike in oil could tip it over the edge into deeper recession/depression which will only help far-right parties like Le Pen who will then kill off the Euro and maybe the entire project. This would have a massive global impact on a world economy still struggling to find stable growth, with some economists comparing such an event to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

This is all exactly what Putin wants. As he invades Ukraine under the pretext that he is protecting Russian speakers from fascists, Europe is too weak and divided to stop him. Putin is calling NATO's and the EU's bluff - how will they respond? Which brings me to my main point:

- Europe has dragged the world into two major world wars (and many more before that). Peace in Europe has been a cornerstone to global stability in the last 50 years. That cornerstone is now crumbling.

Nationalism across Europe has wrecked death and destruction across the world over the last 100 years. And now it's back.

**
a few links:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2748054/Poll-predicts-National-Front-s-Marine-Le-Pen-beat-Hollande-French-presidential-election.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/12/guardian-view-scottish-independence
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29198497___

posted image

2014-09-15 12:44:00 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Are you mother f#####g kidding me? I had no idea the FIPA thing was this bad.
Please read this!

Are you mother f#####g kidding me? I had no idea the FIPA thing was this bad.
Please read this!___

posted image

2014-09-15 11:44:00 (2 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

Maybe instead of thinking American culture provides female equality or respect just because that's what we say, we should reflect on if that's true, or if we're failing to do as we say. To point to Islamic countries and say we're better than that at least isn't enough.

People are converting because our culture is empty and meaningless. Our grand experiment of holding people together only on the basis of economic activity is failing. Our excuse making for immorality, it's just business so it's okay, isn't sufficient. We need leaders that will do the right thing instead of just talk about it.

What we need to do is look at ourselves, be adult, and start taking criticism instead of living in delusion. Otherwise this will only get worse. 

Islamic State attracts female jihadis from U.S. heartland

U.S. law enforcement is investigating a new phenomenon of women from the American heartland joining Islamic State as President Obama vows to cut off the militants' recruiting at home.___Maybe instead of thinking American culture provides female equality or respect just because that's what we say, we should reflect on if that's true, or if we're failing to do as we say. To point to Islamic countries and say we're better than that at least isn't enough.

People are converting because our culture is empty and meaningless. Our grand experiment of holding people together only on the basis of economic activity is failing. Our excuse making for immorality, it's just business so it's okay, isn't sufficient. We need leaders that will do the right thing instead of just talk about it.

What we need to do is look at ourselves, be adult, and start taking criticism instead of living in delusion. Otherwise this will only get worse. 

posted image

2014-09-15 11:31:50 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

Maybe this year I'll try for some tickets.

Meet scientists and mathematicians and see things that you weren't able to see before. Free, live, interactive Public Lecture Series launched by Perimeter Institute For Theoretical Physics on October 1. http://bit.ly/1uCpn9Q___Maybe this year I'll try for some tickets.

posted image

2014-09-15 10:40:44 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

Authoritarian Systems to Ensure Accountability
Yong Zhao on authoritarianism in education. The US already has an authoritarian system in place. It may seem more friendly in upscale communities but that only makes wealthier citizens more acculturated to an authoritarianism they experience as mild and even necessary. Of course, in many other commmunities, the authoritarianism is not mild at all: police inhabit schools and enforce rules, attendance is compulsory even when schools fail completely, families have no real power while truancy is prosecuted as a crime. In the past few years, compusory attendance laws have been extended in a large number of states for their own good. From Zhao's essay:

Authoritarianism has driven America to admire, glorify, and emulate other authoritarian education systems because they seem to produce “results”—defined as test scores. Insteadof va... more »

Authoritarian Systems to Ensure Accountability
Yong Zhao on authoritarianism in education. The US already has an authoritarian system in place. It may seem more friendly in upscale communities but that only makes wealthier citizens more acculturated to an authoritarianism they experience as mild and even necessary. Of course, in many other commmunities, the authoritarianism is not mild at all: police inhabit schools and enforce rules, attendance is compulsory even when schools fail completely, families have no real power while truancy is prosecuted as a crime. In the past few years, compusory attendance laws have been extended in a large number of states for their own good. From Zhao's essay:

Authoritarianism has driven America to admire, glorify, and emulate other authoritarian education systems because they seem to produce “results”—defined as test scores. Instead of valuing what their own educational methods can produce, American leaders envy countries with top test scores in a narrow set of subjects—which is simply a sign of how successfully those countries have homogenized their students. Mistaking China’s miseries as secrets to success, for example, American education pundits and political leaders have been eager to learn from the quintessential authoritarian education system. Ironically, they’ve condemned China’s authoritarian political system in the same breath.

#schools   #standardizedtesting  ___

posted image

2014-09-13 14:38:39 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

Thales of Miletus, the father of science and philosophy 
StuffThatMatters: Science & Philosophy

Although this can be fairly argued, Thales of Miletus is usually regarded as the father of science. Also hailed as the first ever philosopher in the western hemisphere by Bertrand Russel, Thales was indeed a notable figure, without whose achievements, the journey of science and philosophy would have taken a serious toll (it might not have begun that early, had it been not for him). 

Thales was born in Ionia, in the 7th century BC, and he founded what was known as the Ionian school of thought, that produced many other notable early thinkers, including Anaximander and Anaximenes. 

Thales's contributions to scientific thought 

The early Greeks obviously lacked the scientific method that has been the tool of trade for us modern admirers ofsci... more »

Thales of Miletus, the father of science and philosophy 
StuffThatMatters: Science & Philosophy

Although this can be fairly argued, Thales of Miletus is usually regarded as the father of science. Also hailed as the first ever philosopher in the western hemisphere by Bertrand Russel, Thales was indeed a notable figure, without whose achievements, the journey of science and philosophy would have taken a serious toll (it might not have begun that early, had it been not for him). 

Thales was born in Ionia, in the 7th century BC, and he founded what was known as the Ionian school of thought, that produced many other notable early thinkers, including Anaximander and Anaximenes. 

Thales's contributions to scientific thought 

The early Greeks obviously lacked the scientific method that has been the tool of trade for us modern admirers of science. Thought, especially critical thinking, was serious in its infancy back in the time of Thales. That's why, although his ideas might appear too novice to most modern humans, he was still the one who breathed life into science and philosophy. 

1. Natural cause hypothesis Before Thales, all natural phenomena were thought to be the side-effects of some supernatural phenomena going on in the realm of the unseen gods and demons. However, Thales was the first person to put forward what is known as the natural cause hypothesis, which states that whatever we see all around us, are actually results of one or more underlying natural processes or causes. This also gave rise to the deductive reasoning, which enabled Thales to build certain early hypotheses of science. 

The natural cause hypothesis gave rise to natural philosophy, aka the early form of physics. 

2. The primal element: One of the most cherished notions of modern particle physics, fairly regarded as the greatest branch of science by many (including me), is to find the primary substance, the ultimate particle which constitutes everything. Modern M Theory introduces the nation of vibrating filaments of energy or strings, to account for the sheer diversity of particles in the standard model of particle physics today. 

However, even before Democritus and Leucippus who championed the early versions of the atomic hypothesis, Thales is known to have regarded water as the primary substance. This, he concluded, by observing that all living organisms need water to live, and water seems to be more abundant than land mass.

This was wrong, though, but it started the journey of finding the primary substance, and till this day that's continuing. 

3. Naturalism: The philosophy of naturalism developed as a result of Thales's idea that everything has a natural cause. For example, he is said to have remarked that magnets have life, but most probably, by life, he refers to something that would be analogous to the modern term property (in its scientific sense). 

Everything, according to Thales, is the result of something else. This sets forth the world in motion. It was truly the beginning of scientific thought with Thales. 

4. Mathematics as a branch of science: Prior to Thales, mathematics was used in many other parts of the world, including the ancient Babylon and the Rigvedic era in India. However, in the west at least, Thales was the first to fully use mathematics to predict natural events. It is rumoured that Thales had visited Egypt in his youth, and from there he learned the knowledge of mathematics and proto-astronomy. 

The first use of mathematics to predict natural events by Thales was a solar eclipse in 585 BC. This established a crucial idea, that mathematics is the science capable of describing the nature, although it would stay rather underdeveloped and crude for a long time, at least since the Renaissance. 

He also used mathematics to measure the heights of pyramids and other structures, which further emboldened this idea. 

5. Thales's theorem of mathematics: Well, this is pretty basic, and is known to most of us. But Thales was the first to formulate it mathematically, that the angle opposite to the diameter of a circle is always a right angle. 

Legacy 

The intellectual legacy of Thales continued with his disciples, the Ionian school of thought produced other brilliant thinkers as well. Even the Italian school of thought was influenced by him, arguably. 

Although this can be debated as to whether refer to Thales as the Father of science, I believe we can (and should_ argue in his favour.

Sources and reference

http://www.iep.utm.edu/thales/
http://math.mercyhurst.edu/~wrevak/thales.html ___

2014-09-12 16:11:52 (1 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

I've been enjoying coffee, Mozart, and marijuana this morning with blissful results. It made me think of four questions for this diverse community.

Do you enjoy each of the three things I've been enjoying?

And what do you think the least possible number of answers for those three questions are? 

I've been enjoying coffee, Mozart, and marijuana this morning with blissful results. It made me think of four questions for this diverse community.

Do you enjoy each of the three things I've been enjoying?

And what do you think the least possible number of answers for those three questions are? ___

posted image

2014-09-12 12:24:40 (2 comments, 0 reshares, 6 +1s) 

Suppose I told you there was a small china teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. You'd have little reason to believe me. Even less if I said you'd never be able to see it. The thought of believing it would seem absurd.

I think I can safely say the most rational stance to take toward the teapot is to say it isn't there. It's absurd to think a teapot, a human creation, somehow made its way to space in the first place. It's so unlikely we can dismiss the silly notion entirely. Someone believing in this teapot would be a fool.

Now suppose I said between Earth and Mars there was a rock too small to see orbiting in the same way? Could we honestly, with how many little rocks we know orbit around the sun, consider this as absurd or as easily dismissed?

Suppose I told you there was a small china teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. You'd have little reason to believe me. Even less if I said you'd never be able to see it. The thought of believing it would seem absurd.

I think I can safely say the most rational stance to take toward the teapot is to say it isn't there. It's absurd to think a teapot, a human creation, somehow made its way to space in the first place. It's so unlikely we can dismiss the silly notion entirely. Someone believing in this teapot would be a fool.

Now suppose I said between Earth and Mars there was a rock too small to see orbiting in the same way? Could we honestly, with how many little rocks we know orbit around the sun, consider this as absurd or as easily dismissed?___

posted image

2014-09-12 12:23:52 (3 comments, 1 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Suppose I told you there was a small china teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. You'd have little reason to believe me. Even less if I said you'd never be able to see it. The thought of believing it would seem absurd.

I think I can safely say the most rational stance to take toward the teapot is to say it isn't there. It's absurd to think a teapot, a human creation, somehow made its way to space in the first place. It's so unlikely we can dismiss the silly notion entirely. Someone believing in this teapot would be a fool.

Now suppose I said between Earth and Mars there was a rock too small to see orbiting in the same way? Could we honestly, with how many little rocks we know orbit around the sun, consider this as absurd or as easily dismissed?

Suppose I told you there was a small china teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. You'd have little reason to believe me. Even less if I said you'd never be able to see it. The thought of believing it would seem absurd.

I think I can safely say the most rational stance to take toward the teapot is to say it isn't there. It's absurd to think a teapot, a human creation, somehow made its way to space in the first place. It's so unlikely we can dismiss the silly notion entirely. Someone believing in this teapot would be a fool.

Now suppose I said between Earth and Mars there was a rock too small to see orbiting in the same way? Could we honestly, with how many little rocks we know orbit around the sun, consider this as absurd or as easily dismissed?___

posted image

2014-09-11 10:50:40 (0 comments, 4 reshares, 10 +1s) 

Today is #InternetSlowdown Day. Join us in the fight to keep the internet fast and weird. http://boingboing.net/2014/09/10/today-is-internetslowdown-day.html

Today is #InternetSlowdown Day. Join us in the fight to keep the internet fast and weird. http://boingboing.net/2014/09/10/today-is-internetslowdown-day.html___

posted image

2014-09-10 21:28:50 (1 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

#hippies vs. #vampires

#hippies vs. #vampires___

posted image

2014-09-09 06:37:21 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

did you hear who want to murder putin?  read on...

did you hear who want to murder putin?  read on...___

posted image

2014-09-07 11:54:55 (4 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

What's funny here is it was the realisation that a minimum wage might get rid of immigrants that sold them on the idea. Maybe the left needs to start tying all their policy to those sorts of things.

!! Please read before you jump to conclusions.
It is not what you think. !!

I was against the $15 minimum wage. Because this will increase the cost of the product in every area. Fast food restaurant that used to offer $1 hamburger or $2 meal will probably increase the time. Coca-Cola, 1 L bottle that used to be $1.00 will probably end up being $2 or $3. Publication you more example but less leave it to that. 

Then I began to talk with a group of individual who knows more about path and economic that I would. And according to their information the $15 minimum wage will definitely affect all illegal immigrant. So while the illegal immigrant thought that they were smart by demanding to increase to $15 minimum wage. In reality they are condemning their own self might possibly losing their job.

Fast food restaurant, farming, clothes mentioned factor all depend on a very low minimum wage knowing that only illegal immigrant will seek for these jobs. Now that the minimum wage will be raised to $15 an hour, it would no longer be necessary to hire those who are uneducated or illegal immigrant. So if there is no more job for illegal immigrant then there will find himself without a job and have to return back to the country.

That mean that millions of dollars that have been leaving the United States and sent to Latin America were no longer continue. So in return means of dollars will stay in the United States to be circulated. So now that a great deal of the money will stay in the United States there will be more job opportunity for the regular people. In return now everybody can easily afford to pay a $2 hamburger or a $3  1 liter bottle Coca-Cola.

So while all these people who are uneducated or illegal immigrant think that they were being smart by forcing these Corporation that was giving them opportunity for a job. Now will find himself without a job.

At the end the United States economic will win. The middle class will win. And the big company will continue to prosper. 

And those who are uneducated or illegal immigrant would lose at the end.

So now I'm beginning to think that $15.00 minimum wage will not be so bad for our economy and those who are middle-class unemployed. 

Please feel free and let me know what you think.___What's funny here is it was the realisation that a minimum wage might get rid of immigrants that sold them on the idea. Maybe the left needs to start tying all their policy to those sorts of things.

posted image

2014-09-05 16:42:38 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

BREAKING NEWS: Lightning strike kills University of Waterloo student. More to come: http://www.cbc.ca/1.2756915

BREAKING NEWS: Lightning strike kills University of Waterloo student. More to come: http://www.cbc.ca/1.2756915___

posted image

2014-09-05 02:40:47 (16 comments, 0 reshares, 3 +1s) 

The article Paul is responding to is here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/aug/29/libertarian-ideology-natural-enemy-science

I was arguing with a libertarian on the Paul post and I got to thinking what Texas would look like if Paul wasn't constrained by federal regulation.

The first thing that came to mind was education. If you gave educational choices over to the free market in Texas and the southern states, as they exist now, how do you thinking it would turn out?

If one of the choices was a Christian school, that taught the same type of creationism and anti science rhetoric as Paul says he believes in, and that is becoming increasingly popular even today, do you think people would pick it or a competing secular school? Would there be anything to prevent this from happening?

I can even imagine other market forces could make this situation even more likely... more »

The Guardian recently published a blog critical of the libertarian ideology. Listen to my response at Voices of Liberty and share your thoughts in the comments.___The article Paul is responding to is here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/aug/29/libertarian-ideology-natural-enemy-science

I was arguing with a libertarian on the Paul post and I got to thinking what Texas would look like if Paul wasn't constrained by federal regulation.

The first thing that came to mind was education. If you gave educational choices over to the free market in Texas and the southern states, as they exist now, how do you thinking it would turn out?

If one of the choices was a Christian school, that taught the same type of creationism and anti science rhetoric as Paul says he believes in, and that is becoming increasingly popular even today, do you think people would pick it or a competing secular school? Would there be anything to prevent this from happening?

I can even imagine other market forces could make this situation even more likely and more widespread. What if corporate sponsors are involved in the financing and marketing of the schools? Would secular schools in these areas find it hard to attract sponsors for fear of boycotts from consumers?

This could be made even worse if those same corporate sponsors are spending money on advertising to convince people those secular schools are atheist indoctrination camps. Without any regulations on what can be said in media or how it can be said, beyond boycotting which might amount to nothing if the group isn't large enough, whose to stop them?

The real problem I see here is in the essence of what libertarianism is: the worship of self. It's a philosophy based on seeing selfishness as an ultimate virtue. It's very open about this.

A person who thinks selfishness is a virtue to be fostered is a person who puts their own self interest as the top priority. Logically, taken to the extreme, this means in all things they do or say they are thinking of their own interests first. Even when they say they are thinking of yours. A commitment to honesty does not trump their self interest. In fact if it leads to personal profit of any type, then it's less acceptable to be honest, as it would show weakness and be sinful.

That means Ron Paul is lying. I would even say, with how enamoured he is with the atheist mother of libertarian thought, Ayn Rand, going so far as to make his child after her, he's likely lying about the creationism and Christianity. He's lying about the climate denial too.

And he's doing it because to him it's virtuous. It's in his self interest. Even if that means everyone around him, except him and his corporate buddies maybe, are rabid uneducated theists. In fact such an action is entirely consistent with someone only interested in themselves, as they get to lord over the ignorant masses, while enjoying their own personal liberty free

posted image

2014-09-05 02:23:28 (1 comments, 1 reshares, 1 +1s) 

The article Paul is responding to is here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/aug/29/libertarian-ideology-natural-enemy-science

I was arguing with a libertarian on the Paul post and I got to thinking what Texas would look like if Paul wasn't constrained by federal regulation.

The first thing that came to mind was education. If you gave educational choices over to the free market in Texas and the southern states, as they exist now, how do you thinking it would turn out?

If one of the choices was a Christian school, that taught the same type of creationism and anti science rhetoric as Paul says he believes in, and that is becoming increasingly popular even today, do you think people would pick it or a competing secular school? Would there be anything to prevent this from happening?

I can even imagine other market forces could make this situation even more likely... more »

The Guardian recently published a blog critical of the libertarian ideology. Listen to my response at Voices of Liberty and share your thoughts in the comments.___The article Paul is responding to is here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/aug/29/libertarian-ideology-natural-enemy-science

I was arguing with a libertarian on the Paul post and I got to thinking what Texas would look like if Paul wasn't constrained by federal regulation.

The first thing that came to mind was education. If you gave educational choices over to the free market in Texas and the southern states, as they exist now, how do you thinking it would turn out?

If one of the choices was a Christian school, that taught the same type of creationism and anti science rhetoric as Paul says he believes in, and that is becoming increasingly popular even today, do you think people would pick it or a competing secular school? Would there be anything to prevent this from happening?

I can even imagine other market forces could make this situation even more likely and more widespread. What if corporate sponsors are involved in the financing and marketing of the schools? Would secular schools in these areas find it hard to attract sponsors for fear of boycotts from consumers?

This could be made even worse if those same corporate sponsors are spending money on advertising to convince people those secular schools are atheist indoctrination camps. Without any regulations on what can be said in media or how it can be said, beyond boycotting which might amount to nothing if the group isn't large enough, whose to stop them?

The real problem I see here is in the essence of what libertarianism is: the worship of self. It's a philosophy based on seeing selfishness as an ultimate virtue. It's very open about this.

A person who thinks selfishness is a virtue to be fostered is a person who puts their own self interest as the top priority. Logically, taken to the extreme, this means in all things they do or say they are thinking of their own interests first. Even when they say they are thinking of yours. A commitment to honesty does not trump their self interest. In fact if it leads to personal profit of any type, then it's less acceptable to be honest, as it would show weakness and be sinful.

That means Ron Paul is lying. I would even say, with how enamoured he is with the atheist mother of libertarian thought, Ayn Rand, going so far as to make his child after her, he's likely lying about the creationism and Christianity. He's lying about the climate denial too.

And he's doing it because to him it's virtuous. It's in his self interest. Even if that means everyone around him, except him and his corporate buddies maybe, are rabid uneducated theists. In fact such an action is entirely consistent with someone only interested in themselves, as they get to lord over the ignorant masses, while enjoying their own personal liberty free.

posted image

2014-09-03 23:30:47 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 3 +1s) 

It's bad. Very bad.

Before the start of the twentith century Nietzsche warned us God was dead and warned we had entered a time of moral relativism. Good or bad could be defined by each of us, although he figured only a few of us would, while the rest would follow.

Prescient words. Fascists a few decades later would take this, among other ideas, and create an unimaginable amount of misery for the world. A generation would sacrifice greatly to stop it.

In many ways we learned from those mistakes and in many ways overcome the problem of God's absence.

But for me and others who share the same take on the situation we've got another problem arising as we enter the information age. Intellectual relativism. The subjectivity of knowledge.

For every fiction in this world you'll find a voice claiming it as fact. Any fantasy that can be conceived can be believed.... more »

A profusion of similar “takes” erupts online after almost any major news event — and the driving force behind that phenomenon is the fact that readers are in control of the process now, not editors or writers. Is that good or bad? Good question___It's bad. Very bad.

Before the start of the twentith century Nietzsche warned us God was dead and warned we had entered a time of moral relativism. Good or bad could be defined by each of us, although he figured only a few of us would, while the rest would follow.

Prescient words. Fascists a few decades later would take this, among other ideas, and create an unimaginable amount of misery for the world. A generation would sacrifice greatly to stop it.

In many ways we learned from those mistakes and in many ways overcome the problem of God's absence.

But for me and others who share the same take on the situation we've got another problem arising as we enter the information age. Intellectual relativism. The subjectivity of knowledge.

For every fiction in this world you'll find a voice claiming it as fact. Any fantasy that can be conceived can be believed.

Writers and editors used to be curators whose job was to make sure what was being told was as close to being knowledge, truth, as possible. Their was an certain ethics involved, a greater purpose, that drove them.

Now with the amount of money involved in media those editors have long ago been bought and those unwilling to prostitute themselves sent to try and carve a niche for themselves in an overcrowded information marketplace. One that is far more receptive to hearing what they want to hear than hearing what they need to hear to undertake their civic duty.

It's a sad state of affairs that will only get worse. 

posted image

2014-09-02 18:06:59 (8 comments, 2 reshares, 6 +1s) 

Voici le bilan de Vladimir #Poutine pour son pays en 15 ans. Un Président inattaquable #Russie
Et nous?
http://t.co/ZpEkhFyHpB

Voici le bilan de Vladimir #Poutine pour son pays en 15 ans. Un Président inattaquable #Russie
Et nous?
http://t.co/ZpEkhFyHpB___

posted image

2014-08-30 17:55:07 (54 comments, 4 reshares, 16 +1s) 

Something I've always grappled with is this new, to me at least, idea that atheism is a lack of belief. I understand it, that it's trying to make a distinction between how an atheist approaches the question as opposed to a theist, but I still don't think it's precise enough to be the standard. I think words should be concise, plentiful, and specific. That modifiers need to be added and a few words redefined (like the word Gnostic for instance) makes me feel it's not the most elegant solution.

I'm sure the diverse members here have some good opinions on this.

I'll add that since I'm also of the opinion that our words, our language, and how we understand them create our reality this isn't just a trifling concern that can be dismissed as useless semantics. Ultimately it's a reflection of how we will perceive our world. Which could mean these definitions... more »

I tend to go on a rambling tangent when I first wake up. It goes well with my coffee. Today's:

A belief is a proposition held to be true by the person professing it. How true or right that proposition is is irrelevant.

A proposition is a statement that expresses an opinion. The truth of that opinion is again irrelevant.

A few examples:

Mars is a planet.
Capitalism is a good social system.
The earth is six thousand years old.

Each of these is a belief. Where they differ is in how justified each one is and how whether we can consider it fact or opinion.

In the first example we have lots of direct solid evidence. We can see Mars, we can go to Mars, we can measure Mars, and we can confidently say it's a fact Mars is a planet.

In the second example we have lots of evidence to suggest capitalism is a good system, but also some to suggest it isn't. Saying it was good would be justified, although not in the same way the first was, it could be argued against. Mars being a planet can't be.

The last example is not justified. You can believe it, sure, and maybe even supply some evidence. However since it being true would invalidate so many beliefs about our world that are reasonably justified and relies on giving authority to religious stories from a specific culture, we can't say it's justifies, as there just isn't enough evidence. It's an opinion.

Mind you to many who hold strong to the last as fact the beliefs it contradicts and contradict it are not present. So to them it is justified. Which can make things difficult when trying to teach them things that contradict it like most of science. They'll naturally ignore the science to keep the belief.

What about theism and atheism? Both are beliefs and both are justified. To an extent. Both have evidence suggesting them to be true, yet both lack enough evidence to fall then facts or consider them in the same way as we do the first example. It can be argued.

Now it's true that many many theists have very very shitty evidence to justify their beliefs. Lots of them fall squarely into the same camp as the third example. Despite this the core proposition, that there is a being called God who interacts with the world in some way, can remain justified.

However, like many notables have said, there is an ever regressing limit to how justified that belief can be. Many of the mysteries that could be evidence of God are now understood in more practical scientific ways. In many ways it's a very weak opinion and I'm sure that's at least one reason we're willing to defend the idea there isn't a God.
An idea that's itself a belief. It can be expressed by a proposition: there is no God or gods in the universe. It's justified with lots of evidence, and lack of evidence for the opposite idea, but it's still not justified like the first example.

Which is what the idea of unbelief and positive / negative atheism is attempting to do. Make it a standard fact, a starting point, that the universe is without a God. When this idea was first presented that goal was laid out clearly.

Now I understand that most atheists don't hold onto atheism in the same way theists hold onto theism. They don't just believe because someone told them and they are open to changing their minds. It's not even a choice. That's where the evidence leads. So we have a problem where we don't believe in the same way as theists, although some atheists do, which means we should make a distinction.

One way to solve this problem is to identify those who believe with complete certainty in atheism with a distinct label. We could call them anti theists to show they're against the idea of theists completely. We could call then positive or hard or gnostic atheists. While the doubters could be called negative or soft or agnostic atheists.

This would maintain a tidy dichotomy with modifiers to add nuance.

Alternatively we could instead ditch the dichotomy all together in favour of a trichotomy. In the same way we, hopefully, reject the good and evil dichotomy in favour of allowing for things that are not good or bad. This is the route Huxley and Darwin took with their word agnostic. In fact doing this is the exact same as adding antitheist without adding anti atheist on the other end. Except atheist remains atheist instead of antitheist and agnostic remains agnostic instead of atheist.

The only reason not to is so that atheism can be worn like a label to make clear theism is wrong. To announce it to the world. Which in one sense is good, since so much of theism and so many theists are holding unjustified beliefs, but in another sense it's nothing but a conductor for conflict.

Which would be fun except for that odd psychological effect whereby beliefs that are directly opposed are strengthened. The louder atheists get in professing atheism, the stronger theists believe, and the harder they try to protect those beliefs. It's likely partly why the push for creationism keeps increasing instead of regressing.

Who knows. In a few decades we could very realistically see a split between atheists and theists that comes to violence in a decisive place like America. Northern States holding the banner for atheism, whole the southern hold it for theism, and both try to enforce this nationally. Unless of the county splits into individual states and the country dissolves. ___Something I've always grappled with is this new, to me at least, idea that atheism is a lack of belief. I understand it, that it's trying to make a distinction between how an atheist approaches the question as opposed to a theist, but I still don't think it's precise enough to be the standard. I think words should be concise, plentiful, and specific. That modifiers need to be added and a few words redefined (like the word Gnostic for instance) makes me feel it's not the most elegant solution.

I'm sure the diverse members here have some good opinions on this.

I'll add that since I'm also of the opinion that our words, our language, and how we understand them create our reality this isn't just a trifling concern that can be dismissed as useless semantics. Ultimately it's a reflection of how we will perceive our world. Which could mean these definitions are a result of having perspectives limited by something else external to the individual.

posted image

2014-08-30 17:32:03 (2 comments, 6 reshares, 8 +1s) 

I tend to go on a rambling tangent when I first wake up. It goes well with my coffee. Today's:

A belief is a proposition held to be true by the person professing it. How true or right that proposition is is irrelevant.

A proposition is a statement that expresses an opinion. The truth of that opinion is again irrelevant.

A few examples:

Mars is a planet.
Capitalism is a good social system.
The earth is six thousand years old.

Each of these is a belief. Where they differ is in how justified each one is and how whether we can consider it fact or opinion.

In the first example we have lots of direct solid evidence. We can see Mars, we can go to Mars, we can measure Mars, and we can confidently say it's a fact Mars is a planet.

In the second example we have lots of evidence to suggest capitalism is a good... more »

I tend to go on a rambling tangent when I first wake up. It goes well with my coffee. Today's:

A belief is a proposition held to be true by the person professing it. How true or right that proposition is is irrelevant.

A proposition is a statement that expresses an opinion. The truth of that opinion is again irrelevant.

A few examples:

Mars is a planet.
Capitalism is a good social system.
The earth is six thousand years old.

Each of these is a belief. Where they differ is in how justified each one is and how whether we can consider it fact or opinion.

In the first example we have lots of direct solid evidence. We can see Mars, we can go to Mars, we can measure Mars, and we can confidently say it's a fact Mars is a planet.

In the second example we have lots of evidence to suggest capitalism is a good system, but also some to suggest it isn't. Saying it was good would be justified, although not in the same way the first was, it could be argued against. Mars being a planet can't be.

The last example is not justified. You can believe it, sure, and maybe even supply some evidence. However since it being true would invalidate so many beliefs about our world that are reasonably justified and relies on giving authority to religious stories from a specific culture, we can't say it's justifies, as there just isn't enough evidence. It's an opinion.

Mind you to many who hold strong to the last as fact the beliefs it contradicts and contradict it are not present. So to them it is justified. Which can make things difficult when trying to teach them things that contradict it like most of science. They'll naturally ignore the science to keep the belief.

What about theism and atheism? Both are beliefs and both are justified. To an extent. Both have evidence suggesting them to be true, yet both lack enough evidence to fall then facts or consider them in the same way as we do the first example. It can be argued.

Now it's true that many many theists have very very shitty evidence to justify their beliefs. Lots of them fall squarely into the same camp as the third example. Despite this the core proposition, that there is a being called God who interacts with the world in some way, can remain justified.

However, like many notables have said, there is an ever regressing limit to how justified that belief can be. Many of the mysteries that could be evidence of God are now understood in more practical scientific ways. In many ways it's a very weak opinion and I'm sure that's at least one reason we're willing to defend the idea there isn't a God.
An idea that's itself a belief. It can be expressed by a proposition: there is no God or gods in the universe. It's justified with lots of evidence, and lack of evidence for the opposite idea, but it's still not justified like the first example.

Which is what the idea of unbelief and positive / negative atheism is attempting to do. Make it a standard fact, a starting point, that the universe is without a God. When this idea was first presented that goal was laid out clearly.

Now I understand that most atheists don't hold onto atheism in the same way theists hold onto theism. They don't just believe because someone told them and they are open to changing their minds. It's not even a choice. That's where the evidence leads. So we have a problem where we don't believe in the same way as theists, although some atheists do, which means we should make a distinction.

One way to solve this problem is to identify those who believe with complete certainty in atheism with a distinct label. We could call them anti theists to show they're against the idea of theists completely. We could call then positive or hard or gnostic atheists. While the doubters could be called negative or soft or agnostic atheists.

This would maintain a tidy dichotomy with modifiers to add nuance.

Alternatively we could instead ditch the dichotomy all together in favour of a trichotomy. In the same way we, hopefully, reject the good and evil dichotomy in favour of allowing for things that are not good or bad. This is the route Huxley and Darwin took with their word agnostic. In fact doing this is the exact same as adding antitheist without adding anti atheist on the other end. Except atheist remains atheist instead of antitheist and agnostic remains agnostic instead of atheist.

The only reason not to is so that atheism can be worn like a label to make clear theism is wrong. To announce it to the world. Which in one sense is good, since so much of theism and so many theists are holding unjustified beliefs, but in another sense it's nothing but a conductor for conflict.

Which would be fun except for that odd psychological effect whereby beliefs that are directly opposed are strengthened. The louder atheists get in professing atheism, the stronger theists believe, and the harder they try to protect those beliefs. It's likely partly why the push for creationism keeps increasing instead of regressing.

Who knows. In a few decades we could very realistically see a split between atheists and theists that comes to violence in a decisive place like America. Northern States holding the banner for atheism, whole the southern hold it for theism, and both try to enforce this nationally. Unless of the county splits into individual states and the country dissolves. ___

posted image

2014-08-29 07:25:27 (1 comments, 1 reshares, 8 +1s) 

Canada is number one! We're also 2nd, 9th, 10th, 19th, and 22nd... the Council of Canadian Academies has released its report on science culture in Canada. http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-culture.aspx

Canada is number one! We're also 2nd, 9th, 10th, 19th, and 22nd... the Council of Canadian Academies has released its report on science culture in Canada. http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-culture.aspx___

posted image

2014-08-29 07:20:14 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Blame Nobody -- Detroit, MI

Blame Nobody -- Detroit, MI___

posted image

2014-08-29 07:14:44 (0 comments, 1 reshares, 3 +1s) 

Albert Einstein (d. 1955), the famous physicist, was a German Jew who sought political asylum in America when Hitler came to power. 

Although initially a supporter of Zionism, he became increasingly vocal in his criticism of what was happening in Palestine, especially after the Deir Yassin massacre of 1948. 

In this letter, he warns that if a catastrophe should befall the the Jews of Israel, it would be the fault of the British (for causing the whole fiasco in the first place!), and also the fault of the terrorist organizations from within the Jewish ranks. 

Those initial 'terrorist organizations' eventually became the governments of Israel. Menachem Begin is one of the most prominent examples of this; in his younger years he killed British soldiers and Arab civilians in terrorist raids, but eventually he became the Prime Minister of Israel. #alberteinstein   #pa... more »

Albert Einstein (d. 1955), the famous physicist, was a German Jew who sought political asylum in America when Hitler came to power. 

Although initially a supporter of Zionism, he became increasingly vocal in his criticism of what was happening in Palestine, especially after the Deir Yassin massacre of 1948. 

In this letter, he warns that if a catastrophe should befall the the Jews of Israel, it would be the fault of the British (for causing the whole fiasco in the first place!), and also the fault of the terrorist organizations from within the Jewish ranks. 

Those initial 'terrorist organizations' eventually became the governments of Israel. Menachem Begin is one of the most prominent examples of this; in his younger years he killed British soldiers and Arab civilians in terrorist raids, but eventually he became the Prime Minister of Israel. #alberteinstein   #palastine   #israel   #Gaza   #gazawins  ___

posted image

2014-08-27 19:26:43 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

About Harper's attempt to prevent us from  identifying, and tackling, our structural injustices.

About Harper's attempt to prevent us from  identifying, and tackling, our structural injustices.___

posted image

2014-08-25 02:45:34 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

This is infuriatingly catchy and I am so tired of hearing it.

Adventure Time - Imma Punch-a Yo Buns! (Memory of a Memory)

This is infuriatingly catchy and I am so tired of hearing it.

Adventure Time - Imma Punch-a Yo Buns! (Memory of a Memory)___

posted image

2014-08-24 15:29:04 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

The Kitchener Clock Tower

The Kitchener Clock Tower___

posted image

2014-08-24 04:25:46 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

___

posted image

2014-08-23 17:30:57 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

Pstew's Ice Bucket Challenge: http://youtu.be/wkO4NIqAMss

Pstew's Ice Bucket Challenge: http://youtu.be/wkO4NIqAMss___

posted image

2014-08-23 16:53:58 (25 comments, 0 reshares, 8 +1s) 

Below is my commentary on the shared post. One of the strangest things I found when connecting with the wider atheist community was this change of the spectrum between theism and atheism. It's one I don't like very much at all if only because I think a trichotomy is always more nuanced and useful than a dichotomy. Reality is quantum, not binary.

As well, I've found this new spectrum leads to something strikingly similar to Fideism, which is the belief that all matters of religion can and must be determined on the basis of faith alone. Reason should play no part in the process except by coincidence. Except in this case it's reason alone that should be trusted, even of that reasoning is a bit unreasonable, and is actually closer to faith.

The commentary:

I find it odd people have mixed up terms too.

The word Gnostic is not used, anywhere accept in atheist... more »

I do find it odd how people mix terms -
      Gnostic: Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods')
      Agnostic: Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods')
      Theist: Having 'god' (or 'gods')
      Atheist: Without 'god' (or 'gods')

Mostly, the combinations of terms; Result in either contradictions, or redundancies.
      Gnostic Theist (Redundant)
            ~ Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Having 'god' (or 'gods')

      Agnostic Theist (contradiction)
            ~ Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Having 'god' (or 'gods')

      Gnostic Atheist (contradiction)
            ~ Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Without 'god' (or 'gods')

      Agnostic Atheist (Redundant)
            ~ Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Without 'god' (or 'gods')___Below is my commentary on the shared post. One of the strangest things I found when connecting with the wider atheist community was this change of the spectrum between theism and atheism. It's one I don't like very much at all if only because I think a trichotomy is always more nuanced and useful than a dichotomy. Reality is quantum, not binary.

As well, I've found this new spectrum leads to something strikingly similar to Fideism, which is the belief that all matters of religion can and must be determined on the basis of faith alone. Reason should play no part in the process except by coincidence. Except in this case it's reason alone that should be trusted, even of that reasoning is a bit unreasonable, and is actually closer to faith.

The commentary:

I find it odd people have mixed up terms too.

The word Gnostic is not used, anywhere accept in atheist communities, in the same way as agnostic. For example:

I'm agnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're not sure about the issue.

I'm Gnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're on the same page as the ancient Christian sect, the Gnostics, on the issue.

This is because the word angostic was made independently of the word Gnostic. The word Gnostic came long before. Huxley played off of it when coining his word agnostic because the Gnostics were known for claiming special knowledge of God with absolute certainty. And certainty is the opposite of what Huxley was trying to express.

This isn't to say Gnostic doesn't work well in the usage used here. It does. However, it isn't universally accepted term, as it's only found in atheist circles. That's one reason why people are mixing it up.

Another reason is the spectrum it self. Like it or not the questions of God are dealt with primarily by two areas of study: theology and philosophy.

Theology isn't worth exploring for atheists so we won't. Philosophy on the other hand is worth exploring for atheists as it's based on logic and reasoned arguments. How does it define the spectrum? Currently by the one at the top.

Except, that was challenged, by a man named Antony Flew, in his essay On The Presumptions of Atheism. His spectrum was exactly the same as the bottom example except it used the words positive and negative instead of Gnostic and agnostic.

It didn't go over very well. His arguments were not especially convincing and it wasn't widely accepted by anyone except a handful of committed atheists. Most theists, agnostics, and even atheists rejected it.

Why? One reason is it's an example of moving the goalposts. Flew was setting atheism as an assumed default for existence. The issue here is logically you can't say with complete certainty that there isn't a God. No matter how improbable it might be you can't say it for certain. Therefore it can't be a default condition of the universe in the same way gravity or time can be.

A second reason is it attempts to elise the pure agnostic position from the conversation. It tries to assert that since agnosticism is believing only what the evidence shows is sound to believe, and there is no sound evidence for God, all agnostics must be atheists. Which is true. Except what's important in agnosticism is not the conclusion, as it is in theism or atheism, but the method of only following evidence where it may lead. Evidence that leads to neither theism nor atheism conclusively.

Additionally both theism and atheism have certain implications on the other beliefs that make up one's world view which agnosticism does not. Taking to agnosticism with certainty, we could call it positive or Gnostic agnosticism if we wanted, means only following evidence in all matters. When applied to mundane life this has an influence in many areas in a way atheism or theism do not. 

posted image

2014-08-23 16:12:43 (4 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

I should likely polish this argument up into a blog post or something sometime. I've made it a few times. Here's my latest:

I find it odd people have mixed up terms too.

The word Gnostic is not used, anywhere accept in atheist communities, in the same way as agnostic. For example:

I'm agnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're not sure about the issue.

I'm Gnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're on the same page as the ancient Christian sect, the Gnostics, on the issue.

This is because the word angostic was made independently of the word Gnostic. The word Gnostic came long before. Huxley played off of it when coining his word agnostic because the Gnostics were known for claiming special knowledge of God with absolute certainty. And certainty is the opposite of what... more »

I do find it odd how people mix terms -
      Gnostic: Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods')
      Agnostic: Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods')
      Theist: Having 'god' (or 'gods')
      Atheist: Without 'god' (or 'gods')

Mostly, the combinations of terms; Result in either contradictions, or redundancies.
      Gnostic Theist (Redundant)
            ~ Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Having 'god' (or 'gods')

      Agnostic Theist (contradiction)
            ~ Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Having 'god' (or 'gods')

      Gnostic Atheist (contradiction)
            ~ Having 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Without 'god' (or 'gods')

      Agnostic Atheist (Redundant)
            ~ Without 'knowledge of god' (or 'gods') while Without 'god' (or 'gods')___I should likely polish this argument up into a blog post or something sometime. I've made it a few times. Here's my latest:

I find it odd people have mixed up terms too.

The word Gnostic is not used, anywhere accept in atheist communities, in the same way as agnostic. For example:

I'm agnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're not sure about the issue.

I'm Gnostic on the issue of Mexican immigration.

This would be saying you're on the same page as the ancient Christian sect, the Gnostics, on the issue.

This is because the word angostic was made independently of the word Gnostic. The word Gnostic came long before. Huxley played off of it when coining his word agnostic because the Gnostics were known for claiming special knowledge of God with absolute certainty. And certainty is the opposite of what Huxley was trying to express.

This isn't to say Gnostic doesn't work well in the usage used here. It does. However, it isn't universally accepted term, as it's only found in atheist circles. That's one reason why people are mixing it up.

Another reason is the spectrum it self. Like it or not the questions of God are dealt with primarily by two areas of study: theology and philosophy.

Theology isn't worth exploring for atheists so we won't. Philosophy on the other hand is worth exploring for atheists as it's based on logic and reasoned arguments. How does it define the spectrum? Currently by the one at the top.

Except, that was challenged, by a man named Antony Flew, in his essay On The Presumptions of Atheism. His spectrum was exactly the same as the bottom example except it used the words positive and negative instead of Gnostic and agnostic.

It didn't go over very well. His arguments were not especially convincing and it wasn't widely accepted by anyone except a handful of committed atheists. Most theists, agnostics, and even atheists rejected it.

Why? One reason is it's an example of moving the goalposts. Flew was setting atheism as an assumed default for existence. The issue here is logically you can't say with complete certainty that there isn't a God. No matter how improbable it might be you can't say it for certain. Therefore it can't be a default condition of the universe in the same way gravity or time can be.

A second reason is it attempts to elise the pure agnostic position from the conversation. It tries to assert that since agnosticism is believing only what the evidence shows is sound to believe, and there is no sound evidence for God, all agnostics must be atheists. Which is true. Except what's important in agnosticism is not the conclusion, as it is in theism or atheism, but the method of only following evidence where it may lead. Evidence that leads to neither theism nor atheism conclusively.

Additionally both theism and atheism have certain implications on the other beliefs that make up one's world view which agnosticism does not. Taking to agnosticism with certainty, we could call it positive or Gnostic agnosticism if we wanted, means only following evidence in all matters. When applied to mundane life this has an influence in many areas in a way atheism or theism do not. 

posted image

2014-08-22 02:29:26 (1 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

QUOTE: An extensive analysis of economic conditions and government policy reveals that the need for significant systemic change is now a mathematical fact. Corruption, greed and economic inequality have reached a peak tipping point.  Due to the consolidation of wealth, the majority of the population cannot generate enough income to keep up with the cost of living.  In the present economy, under current government policy, 70% of the population is now sentenced to an impoverished existence.

QUOTE: to see how corrupt the United States government has become, just follow the money.  According to the most recent Federal Reserve Flow of Funds report, US households currently have an all-time high $82 trillion in overall wealth.  If that wealth were spread out evenly, every US household would now have $712k.  However, as of the end of 2013, the median household only had $56k in wealth.  From 2007– 201... more »

QUOTE: An extensive analysis of economic conditions and government policy reveals that the need for significant systemic change is now a mathematical fact. Corruption, greed and economic inequality have reached a peak tipping point.  Due to the consolidation of wealth, the majority of the population cannot generate enough income to keep up with the cost of living.  In the present economy, under current government policy, 70% of the population is now sentenced to an impoverished existence.

QUOTE: to see how corrupt the United States government has become, just follow the money.  According to the most recent Federal Reserve Flow of Funds report, US households currently have an all-time high $82 trillion in overall wealth.  If that wealth were spread out evenly, every US household would now have $712k.  However, as of the end of 2013, the median household only had $56k in wealth.  From 2007 – 2013, overall wealth increased 26%, while the median household lost a shocking 43% of their wealth. If median wealth continues to decline at this rate, over 50% of US households will be bankrupt within the next decade.

QUOTE: The top 1% of the 1%, the .01%, now has 28% of the 1%’s wealth.  When you factor in hidden wealth, they have an estimated 33% of the 1%’s wealth.  An individual must have over $100 million in wealth to be in the .01%.

QUOTE: As the ultra-rich .01% amasses unprecedented wealth, they are forcing the overwhelming majority of the population into extreme economic insecurity and ever-increasing debt.

QUOTE: If you are struggling to get by and running up debt to make ends meet, it is not your fault. It is the intentional outcome of government policy and economic central planning. In the present economy, it is impossible for 70% of the working age population to earn enough income to afford basic necessities, without taking on ever-increasing levels of debt, which they will never be able to pay back because there are not enough jobs that generate the necessary income to keep up with the cost of living.

QUOTE: For every 3.4 working age people, there is only one that can generate an income high enough to cover the cost of living without taking on debt.  In total, only 20% of the overall population currently generates enough income to sustain the cost of living.  he institutions of America.

Thank you +Stefan Andersson
https://plus.google.com/u/0/100879073221249443365/posts___

posted image

2014-08-21 19:21:20 (1 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

Richard really needs to learn to watch what he says on Twitter. Like it or not he's the poster boy for atheism and everything he says, again like it or not, is taken as a reflection of atheism.

Still, he's right, and it doesn't take much thought to understand his point.

The universal ethic is the ethical filter these questions are out through for utilitarians like Dawkins. So you have to ask:

If I had a choice to have down syndrome would I take it?

What if you had a choice to give it to someone, or if someone could give it to you, would there be a moral issue?

If for instance there was a pill that could afflict someone with downs would there be an issue with giving that to someone?

That's not to say people who have made the choice to have children with downs, assuming they knew and had that choice, are bad or wrong or... more »

Richard really needs to learn to watch what he says on Twitter. Like it or not he's the poster boy for atheism and everything he says, again like it or not, is taken as a reflection of atheism.

Still, he's right, and it doesn't take much thought to understand his point.

The universal ethic is the ethical filter these questions are out through for utilitarians like Dawkins. So you have to ask:

If I had a choice to have down syndrome would I take it?

What if you had a choice to give it to someone, or if someone could give it to you, would there be a moral issue?

If for instance there was a pill that could afflict someone with downs would there be an issue with giving that to someone?

That's not to say people who have made the choice to have children with downs, assuming they knew and had that choice, are bad or wrong or terrible. Just that maybe their reasons for doing so have less to do with the child and more to do with their own beliefs or preconceptions. It's hard for me to see the child's well being and happiness as being paramount in that decision. ___

posted image

2014-08-21 17:34:46 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 3 +1s) 

#420NO

#420NO___

posted image

2014-08-21 17:00:05 (59 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

Cross posting this to get varied opinions and with the question: is exclusivity viable in a globalized world?

Living where I do, in a student city, I am accustomed to a level of religious and cultural diversity usually only found in capitals or much larger cities. To me the only way this works peacefully is for all people to let go of the notion of religious exclusivity. Otherwise there is no possibility of cohesion between the people.

Interested in opinions from Muslims on this rather lengthy article. While the author is being critical of Islam in parts, I do think it's a fair and rational criticism, not the typical fear mongering we often see from Western intellectuals.

Here's a selection from the conclusion:

Instead of permitting the leaders of ISIS to label everyone else a heretic, where are the authoritative voices of Muslim leaders that declare for everyone to hear that the era of the caliphs is over. That Islam is a faith, an expression of a belief in God and his sovereignty, and in the prophet who ended the brutality of the tribes and who called Allah compassionate and merciful: “Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.”(Qur’an, 5:32) That Islam stands for discovery, and literature and scientific progress and justice as it is defined in modern contexts, not in medieval jurisprudence.___Cross posting this to get varied opinions and with the question: is exclusivity viable in a globalized world?

Living where I do, in a student city, I am accustomed to a level of religious and cultural diversity usually only found in capitals or much larger cities. To me the only way this works peacefully is for all people to let go of the notion of religious exclusivity. Otherwise there is no possibility of cohesion between the people.

posted image

2014-08-21 16:45:55 (0 comments, 1 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Interested in opinions from Muslims on this rather lengthy article. While the author is being critical of Islam in parts, I do think it's a fair and rational criticism, not the typical fear mongering we often see from Western intellectuals.

Here's a selection from the conclusion:

Instead of permitting the leaders of ISIS to label everyone else a heretic, where are the authoritative voices of Muslim leaders that declare for everyone to hear that the era of the caliphs is over. That Islam is a faith, an expression of a belief in God and his sovereignty, and in the prophet who ended the brutality of the tribes and who called Allah compassionate and merciful: “Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.”(Qur’an, 5:32) That Islam stands for discovery, and literature andscienti... more »

Interested in opinions from Muslims on this rather lengthy article. While the author is being critical of Islam in parts, I do think it's a fair and rational criticism, not the typical fear mongering we often see from Western intellectuals.

Here's a selection from the conclusion:

Instead of permitting the leaders of ISIS to label everyone else a heretic, where are the authoritative voices of Muslim leaders that declare for everyone to hear that the era of the caliphs is over. That Islam is a faith, an expression of a belief in God and his sovereignty, and in the prophet who ended the brutality of the tribes and who called Allah compassionate and merciful: “Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.”(Qur’an, 5:32) That Islam stands for discovery, and literature and scientific progress and justice as it is defined in modern contexts, not in medieval jurisprudence.___

posted image

2014-08-21 16:42:29 (1 comments, 2 reshares, 5 +1s) 

I've posted from this guy before. He's pretty critical of the new atheist movement and pretty critical of Dawkins and Harris and Hitchens. He's one of those atheists who are often called apologists or too soft when it comes to Islam.

His latest post gives insight into why he can be tolerant of the religion, yet still very critical. It's a good example of solid criticism that doesn't fall into hateful or irrational rhetoric.

And I think it suggests a good solution to the problem. Even if it's one we have little control over. 

I've posted from this guy before. He's pretty critical of the new atheist movement and pretty critical of Dawkins and Harris and Hitchens. He's one of those atheists who are often called apologists or too soft when it comes to Islam.

His latest post gives insight into why he can be tolerant of the religion, yet still very critical. It's a good example of solid criticism that doesn't fall into hateful or irrational rhetoric.

And I think it suggests a good solution to the problem. Even if it's one we have little control over. ___

posted image

2014-08-20 16:55:53 (1 comments, 1 reshares, 3 +1s) 

Dead at noon: B.C. woman ends her life rather than suffer indignity of dementia (with video)

Dead at noon: B.C. woman ends her life rather than suffer indignity of dementia (with video)___

posted image

2014-08-20 04:54:53 (2 comments, 0 reshares, 4 +1s) 

This is a profoundly disturbing editorial. It's an op-ed written by a police officer in the Washington Post, and its message is very simple: 

"If you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me. Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to cooperate for that long?"

I wish I could tell you that this article betrayed a sense of the absurd, or that it was meant in some kind of satirical fashion. It isn't. His argument is simple: you have no idea what's going on for that cop or what the cop isgoing through. The cop... more »

This is a profoundly disturbing editorial. It's an op-ed written by a police officer in the Washington Post, and its message is very simple: 

"If you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me. Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to cooperate for that long?"

I wish I could tell you that this article betrayed a sense of the absurd, or that it was meant in some kind of satirical fashion. It isn't. His argument is simple: you have no idea what's going on for that cop or what the cop is going through. The cop has the right to use whatever force is needed. So if you don't want to get shot, do everything the cop says, never argue, never object. Later, he says, you can "ask for a supervisor, lodge a complaint or contact civil rights organizations if you believe your rights were violated."

To list a few of the exceptionally obvious things which this ignores:

(1) All of the arguments that you don't know what a cop is going through, that this "routine traffic stop" is actually very dangerous for them, and so on, apply just as well to the person being stopped. In fact, especially if you don't look white and upper-class enough, that routine stop is even more dangerous for you than for the cop: the cop doesn't know if you're armed and willing to become violent, but (by Dutta's own admission) you do know that the cop is. Saying that people being stopped need to be respectful and do what the cop says, but that the cop isn't under any such obligation to anyone else, is an invitation for violence.

(2) These post facto remedies which he suggests are incredibly limited in their value. Go ahead and lodge a complaint; it will promptly be filed in the appropriate place. Under the POBOR (Peace Officers' Bill of Rights, a California law) and similar laws elsewhere, you get all sorts of guarantees here: for example, that if a decision is made in regards to your complaint, you will be notified of that decision within 30 days. It does not guarantee, for example, that a decision will actually be made, and in fact it guarantees that if a decision isn't made within a year, the officer will face no consequences from it. The police have a tremendous degree of immunity, and outside of very exceptional situations, are investigated only by an internal system.

(You can read the text of the POBOR here: https://www.cslea.com/legal/pobor . Other states have similar laws, but you should check your own state's laws for the details)

(3) If a police officer does something wrong during a stop, it can have serious consequences for you, which will not be redressed no matter what. As far as the police are concerned, an arrest isn't a "consequence," since the courts can easily throw it out; but go ahead and explain that to your employer when you're telling them why you didn't come to work. Being threatened and harassed every time you walk out the door in your neighborhood isn't a "consequence," because if the cop didn't have a good reason, they wouldn't have done anything.

Knowing that you might be publicly bullied and humiliated, in front of your children, your spouse, or your employer, that you may be searched, beaten, or arrested at any time -- and that such things happen routinely to you and everyone around you -- is something acceptable, in the view of this editorial, because you have the right to file a grievance later with the same organization which has decided that this behavior is, at a baseline, OK.


My purpose here isn't to say that people should be rude or threatening to cops. I'm saying that the obligation of police and citizens is a reciprocal obligation. It is absolutely true that the work of police is dangerous and complicated, and they require certain allowances in order to be able to do their jobs; however, if you translate that to "they must be granted unlimited authority over the citizenry, and must never be challenged, except after the fact and in very limited ways," then the police have been set up to become villains, not heroes. 

Dutta's attitude is profoundly corrupted: he has taken the real and reasonable fears of police about doing their jobs, and expanded it into a notion of the police as being a class above the public, with tremendous powers of force and coercion, and subject to not even contradiction. If you heard this sort of statement from soldiers, you would think you were living in a military junta; if you hear this from police officers, you wonder if they think we are living in a junta.

h/t +Xenophrenia for the link.___

posted image

2014-08-19 16:48:54 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

Orwell's review of Mein Kampf http://boingboing.net/2014/08/17/orwells-review-of-mein-kampf.html

Orwell's review of Mein Kampf http://boingboing.net/2014/08/17/orwells-review-of-mein-kampf.html___

posted image

2014-08-19 04:44:29 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 1 +1s) 

___

posted image

2014-08-18 23:58:25 (0 comments, 3 reshares, 17 +1s) 

It's a sign !

It's a sign !___

posted image

2014-08-18 00:03:41 (2 comments, 1 reshares, 11 +1s) 

#Capitalism by Marc Hermitte 

#Capitalism by Marc Hermitte ___

posted image

2014-08-17 11:46:04 (1 comments, 3 reshares, 12 +1s) 

___

posted image

2014-08-15 12:09:24 (0 comments, 1 reshares, 12 +1s) 

___

posted image

2014-08-10 12:37:33 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

Professor Barbara Oakley gives a TedTalk on "Learning How to Learn". Watch her talk, be inspired, join her course and become a better learner.

Professor Barbara Oakley gives a TedTalk on "Learning How to Learn". Watch her talk, be inspired, join her course and become a better learner.___

posted image

2014-08-09 07:22:11 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 2 +1s) 

if you don't believe that Russia is in the wrong here, AND you don't believe it's Neo-Nazi's are the ones in charge, then Take it from a HUMANITARIAN PERSPECTIVE. MORE PEOPLE KILLED HERE IN LAST TWO WEEKS THAN 5+ MONTHS OF GAZA, YET, WHY NO ONE IS SPEAKING OUT AGAINST IT?... 

BECAUSE THE US and EU ARE SUPPORTING KIEV. IF RUSSIA WAS SUPPORTING THE SEPARATIST AS STATED, WHY WOULD SO MANY BE FLEEING TO RUSSIA AND WHY THERE ARE NO REFUGEE'S IN KIEV, WHY DOES KIEV STATE THEY HAVE NO REFUGEE"S?? 

could it be, the people feel safer in Russia than they do their own government? 

I'm going to probably be banned now, because
1. I want you to really think about your actions.
2. Because IF you blogged, tweeted about the injustice of Israel, and do not repost / report on this too, YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
#ukrainecrisis   #uk... more »

if you don't believe that Russia is in the wrong here, AND you don't believe it's Neo-Nazi's are the ones in charge, then Take it from a HUMANITARIAN PERSPECTIVE. MORE PEOPLE KILLED HERE IN LAST TWO WEEKS THAN 5+ MONTHS OF GAZA, YET, WHY NO ONE IS SPEAKING OUT AGAINST IT?... 

BECAUSE THE US and EU ARE SUPPORTING KIEV. IF RUSSIA WAS SUPPORTING THE SEPARATIST AS STATED, WHY WOULD SO MANY BE FLEEING TO RUSSIA AND WHY THERE ARE NO REFUGEE'S IN KIEV, WHY DOES KIEV STATE THEY HAVE NO REFUGEE"S?? 

could it be, the people feel safer in Russia than they do their own government? 

I'm going to probably be banned now, because
1. I want you to really think about your actions.
2. Because IF you blogged, tweeted about the injustice of Israel, and do not repost / report on this too, YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
#ukrainecrisis   #ukrainewar2014   #ukrainewarcrimes   #UN   #UNWoman (SPEAK OUT WOMEN where is your solidarity?)
#unightednationswherethefuckareyou   #ukraine  ___

posted image

2014-08-08 08:10:06 (0 comments, 0 reshares, 0 +1s) 

AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE | Recapping Al Jazeera's improved #AJAfrica coverage: "Most of these people have walked for weeks, months, in the bush," Rachel Marsden of MSF tells Al Jazeera of C.A.R. refugees in Cameroon. | http://aje.me/1vgzIvp | Join the conversation with #AJAfrica

AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE | Recapping Al Jazeera's improved #AJAfrica coverage: "Most of these people have walked for weeks, months, in the bush," Rachel Marsden of MSF tells Al Jazeera of C.A.R. refugees in Cameroon. | http://aje.me/1vgzIvp | Join the conversation with #AJAfrica___

Buttons

A special service of CircleCount.com is the following button.

The button shows the number of followers you have directly in a small button. You can add this button to your website, like the +1-Button of Google or the Like-Button of Facebook.






You can add this button directly in your website. For more information about the CircleCount Buttons and the description how to add them to another page click here.

Daniel VoisinTwitterFacebookCircloscope