Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The Crusades were started by the Muslim Turks invading a Christian occupied land (I don't remember which any more). The Pope requested an alliance so as to defend that land. What you hear most during these antiChristian political days, will always be tainted and spun against the Christians.
Were this true they would have stopped at defending that land (Byzantine), rather than making it more of an afterthought and opting instead to march to the Levant to capture the Holy Land in the name of the Lord.
Even the famous Spanish Inquisition was started by the Jews pretending to be Catholic priests to the point that again, the Pope had to call a large scale inquiry and examination to try to find out who was pretending to be what they weren't.
Do you have a remotely credible source for this? Because in all my studies of the Crusades I've never once read anything of the sort.
I am not one of them, but to my knowledge, every Christian involved conflict has been an attack upon the Christians, usually subtly started. Even when they fought among themselves, it was found to be due to sly misinformation from outside, a practice in great use today.
No offense, but judging from the rest of your post I'd wager that you're not quite as knowledgeable on this as you might think.
This discussion could go anywhere. But what do you all feel is the greatest threat to civilization today?
I know some of you might be tempted to argue with my usage of the word "evil." But we can argue the existence of good and evil somewhere else. Ignore it and use the word "threat" if it suits you better.
I'm inclined to think that the greatest threat to any notions of civilization is quite simply a lack of compassion, courtesy and respect to our fellow inhabitants of this stunningly beautiful planet - animal, plant or human.
Or, to put it another way, a lack of compassion, courtesy and respect to this incredibly wonderous bio-sphere which we ALL must SHARE.
Maybe that sounds a little simplistic, but I'm convinced that if we can only get that bit right, then all of the rest of our perceived problems will fall into the correct perspective and like mathematical problems, they will be solved.
Yes, I am Attached to this world. After all, I'll be spending the rest of my life here.
We're talking mostly about social threats, but if you're also interested in the natural variety --
By Issac Asimov: A Choice of Catastrophes. He goes through various possible disasters, ranking them: these would destroy civilization; these, humanity; these, all life on Earth; these, the planet.
Hello all (and Photo) I think this is an interesting question. I think that the core threat is egoic impulse. By this I mean to say the belief that the “I” and all of its corollaries—individual and social—promote ignorance of what we can conveniently refer to as the ultimate truths (non-self, impermanence, interconnectivity and so on). Society and its policies can operate on egoic principle or the principle of inclusivity…it is a reality that capital markets must operate on the dangerous fictions of “property ownership” for example. Adding progressive or social-conscious principles may well check these monetarily useful means by reminding our policy makers of the human-interconnected realities of which we all are a part and not just a few propertied others.
Photo: You wrote, “Global warming is not a problem. It's a political issue, see ClimateGate for details. ”
This is a so-called popular argument against global warming. It has no teeth-however. The argument is that Hackers broke into the database of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit - and put the files they stole on the Internet. The 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving scientists pushing the man-made warming theory, suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more or so goes the FOX news-like convo…
The facts: Indeed, some of the correspondence isn’t something we would enjoy reading-however, an informed examination of their emails made use of “suggestive” communications that reveal technical discussion well known in peer reviewed literature….which isn’t understood at all by the average layman. These few “emails” of a more private nature (though still possessing a wealth of technical language) is hardly overwhelming evidence against anthropogenic global warming. Some of these emails are stomach churning-I agree. For example, one exchange contains a scathing discussion of skeptics such as Steve McIntyre and Roger Pielke, including imaginings of violence. The most quoted email…enjoyed by Fox and anti-globalist was one written by Phil Jones: “"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." One quote helps us clear up that “decline” here doesn’t mean decline in temperature: "Mike's Nature trick" refers to a technique (aka "trick of the trade") used in a paper published in Nature by lead author Michael Mann (Mann 1998). The "trick" is the technique of plotting recent instrumental data along with the reconstructed data. This places recent global warming trends in the context of temperature changes over longer time scales.”
Also, “The second most cited email is from climate scientist and IPCC lead author Kevin Trenberth. The highlighted quote is this: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." This has been most commonly interpreted (among skeptics) as climate scientists secretly admitting amongst themselves that global warming really has stopped. Trenberth is actually discussing a paper he'd recently published that discusses the planet's energy budget - how much net energy is flowing into our climate and where it's going (Trenberth 2009). In Trenberth's paper, he discusses how we know the planet is continually heating due to increasing carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, surface temperature sometimes shows short term cooling periods. This is due to internal variability and Trenberth was lamenting that our observation systems can't comprehensively track all the energy flow through the climate system. More on Trenberth's travesty...” ‘
ClimateGate—so-called—has been diligently dealt with by those who authored these emails as well the scientific community. As far as that community is concerned it isn’t a political issue at all. That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 19 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position. This is indeed a dead issue in the community at large. It isn’t politically this is true. It isn’t for industry and this is also true. However, both of these institutions have other interests than the science motivating their private interests.
Also, I find your discussion on overpopulation interesting. I think if we ignore, national boundaries, traditions, racial tensions, religious struggles, geography, and the issues tied up in private property…perhaps you may be correct. But, in our country, as well as most others, land and resources are allocated to a select few. So, while it may be possible to supply land and food for much of the world, our socio-political realities make this a sure fantasy for the present. Thanks all for the discussion, Eric D.
I also like sufis, though usually they are better parboiled.Palzang
Has anyone ever noticed how similar some Sufi beliefs/practices are to Buddhism? Turns out the person who founded Sufism was born and raised in an area of Inner Asia that was Buddhist. The Arabs penetrated Asia toward the ancient Buddhist centers in the oasis towns like Kotan, at one time.
This discussion could go anywhere. But what do you all feel is the greatest threat to civilization today?
I know some of you might be tempted to argue with my usage of the word "evil." But we can argue the existence of good and evil somewhere else. Ignore it and use the word "threat" if it suits you better.
Please try to be as specific as possible.
Greed, Hate, and Ignorance. AKA, The 3 Poisons. The Buddha was way ahead of his time.
We're talking mostly about social threats, but if you're also interested in the natural variety --
By Issac Asimov: A Choice of Catastrophes. He goes through various possible disasters, ranking them: these would destroy civilization; these, humanity; these, all life on Earth; these, the planet.
(Actually I found it pretty boring.)
Buddha bless,
Conrad.
Social threats stem from the actions of people. What causes the evil actions of people? The ego unchecked and its tendency to mute our ability to be compassionate and to love.
I personally think humans as a whole are the greatest threat to our species. We will eventually destroy ourselves via a varierty of causes which may include global warming, over population, war which consists of superior technology, chemical nuclear and of course the muslim brotherhood. By this last statement I do not refer to islam or even muslims as I have a couple of muslim friends, but there is a huge movement which is growing and will soon act, they do not shy away either, they are very upfront about their actions.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I thought this thread had been buried, but no. Never let a good story go....
A new thread might have been more aposite.
Mind you - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose".....
Ah, you have reered your head federica, it has been a while. How are doing these days?
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I refuse to answer that without my lawyer present....
Seriously, things are cool. That is to say, Life has moments of some suffering, some not-so suffering and some not suffering at all. in other words.... Life is an ongoing process...
Comments
Palzang
Were this true they would have stopped at defending that land (Byzantine), rather than making it more of an afterthought and opting instead to march to the Levant to capture the Holy Land in the name of the Lord.
Do you have a remotely credible source for this? Because in all my studies of the Crusades I've never once read anything of the sort.
No offense, but judging from the rest of your post I'd wager that you're not quite as knowledgeable on this as you might think.
Viruses
ha ha that was funny.
Or, to put it another way, a lack of compassion, courtesy and respect to this incredibly wonderous bio-sphere which we ALL must SHARE.
Maybe that sounds a little simplistic, but I'm convinced that if we can only get that bit right, then all of the rest of our perceived problems will fall into the correct perspective and like mathematical problems, they will be solved.
Yes, I am Attached to this world. After all, I'll be spending the rest of my life here.
I rather like Buddhists, but I couldn't eat a whole one.
Greed, Anger, Ignorance, Arrogance and Doubt
The 5 desires:
Wealth, Fame, sex, food and sleep
Not even an ascetic?
By Issac Asimov: A Choice of Catastrophes. He goes through various possible disasters, ranking them: these would destroy civilization; these, humanity; these, all life on Earth; these, the planet.
(Actually I found it pretty boring.)
Buddha bless,
Conrad.
Buddha bless,
Conrad.
I am with him!:)
I think this is an interesting question. I think that the core threat is egoic impulse. By this I mean to say the belief that the “I” and all of its corollaries—individual and social—promote ignorance of what we can conveniently refer to as the ultimate truths (non-self, impermanence, interconnectivity and so on). Society and its policies can operate on egoic principle or the principle of inclusivity…it is a reality that capital markets must operate on the dangerous fictions of “property ownership” for example. Adding progressive or social-conscious principles may well check these monetarily useful means by reminding our policy makers of the human-interconnected realities of which we all are a part and not just a few propertied others.
Photo:
You wrote,
“Global warming is not a problem. It's a political issue, see ClimateGate for details. ”
This is a so-called popular argument against global warming. It has no teeth-however. The argument is that Hackers broke into the database of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit - and put the files they stole on the Internet. The 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving scientists pushing the man-made warming theory, suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more or so goes the FOX news-like convo…
The facts: Indeed, some of the correspondence isn’t something we would enjoy reading-however, an informed examination of their emails made use of “suggestive” communications that reveal technical discussion well known in peer reviewed literature….which isn’t understood at all by the average layman. These few “emails” of a more private nature (though still possessing a wealth of technical language) is hardly overwhelming evidence against anthropogenic global warming. Some of these emails are stomach churning-I agree. For example, one exchange contains a scathing discussion of skeptics such as Steve McIntyre and Roger Pielke, including imaginings of violence.
The most quoted email…enjoyed by Fox and anti-globalist was one written by Phil Jones:
“"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
One quote helps us clear up that “decline” here doesn’t mean decline in temperature: "Mike's Nature trick" refers to a technique (aka "trick of the trade") used in a paper published in Nature by lead author Michael Mann (Mann 1998). The "trick" is the technique of plotting recent instrumental data along with the reconstructed data. This places recent global warming trends in the context of temperature changes over longer time scales.”
Also, “The second most cited email is from climate scientist and IPCC lead author Kevin Trenberth. The highlighted quote is this: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." This has been most commonly interpreted (among skeptics) as climate scientists secretly admitting amongst themselves that global warming really has stopped. Trenberth is actually discussing a paper he'd recently published that discusses the planet's energy budget - how much net energy is flowing into our climate and where it's going (Trenberth 2009). In Trenberth's paper, he discusses how we know the planet is continually heating due to increasing carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, surface temperature sometimes shows short term cooling periods. This is due to internal variability and Trenberth was lamenting that our observation systems can't comprehensively track all the energy flow through the climate system. More on Trenberth's travesty...” ‘
ClimateGate—so-called—has been diligently dealt with by those who authored these emails as well the scientific community. As far as that community is concerned it isn’t a political issue at all. That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 19 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position. This is indeed a dead issue in the community at large. It isn’t politically this is true. It isn’t for industry and this is also true. However, both of these institutions have other interests than the science motivating their private interests.
Also, I find your discussion on overpopulation interesting. I think if we ignore, national boundaries, traditions, racial tensions, religious struggles, geography, and the issues tied up in private property…perhaps you may be correct. But, in our country, as well as most others, land and resources are allocated to a select few. So, while it may be possible to supply land and food for much of the world, our socio-political realities make this a sure fantasy for the present.
Thanks all for the discussion,
Eric D.
(oops! No, Cloud, I'm not stalking you. :rolleyes: )
A new thread might have been more aposite.
Mind you -
"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose".....
Seriously, things are cool.
That is to say, Life has moments of some suffering, some not-so suffering and some not suffering at all.
in other words.... Life is an ongoing process...
Thanks for asking TT. Nice to see you again.
I did not know this thread was so old, so sorry for bumping an old topic of conversation. Interesting concept though
this might be bypassing the question but
whats the most messed up thing that can happen to humans by humanity
nuclear war, quite possibly doing nothing about climate change... world war three...
if any of that crap happens it's everyone elses fault and not mine so no comment I donno why you guys would do that to yourselves