Oops, got sidetracked. Two bands stood out from KEXP's Bumbershoot videos, the first one was Posse, and I quite liked the whole performance but couldn't decide on any one song to post... so did them a slight injustice and didn't post any.

You tell me that you understand science, and were once very scientific, then you drop --excuse me-- a giant turd like this. I could as easily say, "If the Theory of Evolution is correct, then all living creatures are evidence of Theory of Evolution's correctness," and it would still be a meaningless statement because if we already know something is true (as in the premise), then evidence is redundant. It's precisely when we don't know something that evidence becomes useful. This is probably the hardest part about talking to you -- your weak grasp on how science and logic work. And don't take this as an internet ad hom. I'm being straight with you, really. It's not your strong suit. Own it.

Actually, I think that it is you who is demonstrating a weak grasp of logic here. It seems that what I was getting at went right over your head. What you've done here is rip my statement out of its context, and then claimed I was using it in a meaningless way that I never intended. It is a straw man argument, really, and yes you did use ad homs. A giant turd? Saying that its really hard to talk to me because of my weak grasp of science and logic? Come on. I had thought that our dialogue had transcended these kind of petty caricatures.

In context, the statement is designed to get you think outside the box you're in and weigh both sides of the issue equally. It's not an argument in itself. The statement that if God exists, everything that exists is empirical evidence for God is a logically valid statement. If God exists, everything you're looking at right now if proof that He exists. Obviously, this statement by itself doesn't help you determine whether God actually exists or not. You could just as easily say that if God doesn't exist, everything that does exist is proof that He doesn't exist. Therefore, the question is, how would you tell if you're in a Universe that God designed?

The real question is, why is either possibility more or less likely than the other? You haven't addressed this, but simply have taken a leap of faith in favor of your atheistic naturalism. You say, I don't see the Planner, and I didn't see the Planner make this Universe, therefore it is not designed until proven otherwise. The problem with this is that you can't even begin to justify this assumption until you can explain why either possibility is any more likely than the other. You can't say you don't see any empirical evidence because it might be staring you in the face everywhere you look. To analyze how either possibility is more likely than the other you have to discard your assumptions about what you have seen or haven't seen and think about this on a deeper level.

Taking it a step deeper, the fact is, you would only expect to see exactly what you do see, because you are in fact a created being. A created being should expect to find himself existing in an environment capable of creating him. The crux is though that this environment is also finely tuned. You should expect to see what you do, but you should also be surprised to find that it is finely tuned. It a bit like being taken out for execution in front of a firing squad of 100 expert marksmen 3 feet away, and finding yourself alive after all of them opened fire. You should not be surprised to find yourself alive, because obviously you would have to be alive to find yourself alive, but you should be surprised to find that 100 expert marksmen missed you from 3 feet away. In the same way, you should be surprised to find yourself to be a created being in a finely tuned Universe.

What you have on your hands is a Universe full of empirical evidence that it was or wasn't designed. There are only two possibilities; the Universe was either planned or unplanned. Again, how would you tell the difference? What would you expect to see which is different from what you do see? What would make either possibility more likely? That is the point. A finely tuned Universe should tip the scales of that evidence, if you are being honest about what you can really prove.

Supernatural creation is easier to understand, but just about any other explanation is as or more plausible. When you consider some of the extreme coincidences that are required for us to exist, it stretches the mind. But we've had billions of years to evolve, and if we're talking about the whole universe, it could be that 10^one trillion universes with different physical properties have formed and collapsed, and when a balanced one finally came out of the mix, it stuck around, and here we are.

It could be, except there is no evidence there is. Why is it you that can imagine an infinite number of hypothetical Universes with no evidence, but you object to supernatural creation as somehow being less plausible than that? There is no evidence that it is less plausible, you simply assume it is. Sure, if you use your magic genie of time and chance you could imagine just about anything could happen. Scientists agree:

Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.

George Wald, Nobel Laureate, Harvard
Physics and Chemistry of Life p.12

The odds of any of this happening by itself far exceeds the number of atoms in the Universe, and there is no actual proof that it actually could happen by itself, but you still believe it to be more plausible. Why is that? In the end, why is it plausible that anything would exist at all? Why isn't everything equally unlikely in the end? Notice what George Wald said? He said time itself performs the *miracles*. He said that because the existence of life is nothing short of a miracle, but even knowing that, you would still say God is implausible. I think these arguments are what is implausible.

Look at how these scientists come to the same conclusions as you have:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/blog/2012/03/is-the-universe-fine-tuned-for-life/

They acknowledge there are only two possibilities, one being God, but since they hate that possibility more than they hate embracing the anthropic principle, they go with that instead, having absolutely no evidence to base that conclusion on. They simply don't want to acknowledge the obvious, which is that a finely tuned Universe is *much* stronger evidence for an omnipotent God than it is for multiple Universes.

I would take a declarative statement about him, and see what implications it had, what predictions it made, then see if they were testable, either theoretically or practically. Like theoretically if God is omniscient, it means he knows everything, and if I can find an example of something he absolutely cannot know, then I've proven he's not omniscient.

What God says is that as the Heavens are higher than the Earth, so are His ways above our ways, and His thoughts above our thoughts. He also calls the wisdom of this world, foolishness. So God has directly said that it is only by His revelation and not our understanding that we can come to know Him. A limited temporal creature, trying to disprove Gods existence with his own corrupt reasoning is kind of laughable, isn't it?

In any case, it's easy to think of things God doesn't know or can't do. God doesn't know what it feels like to not exist. God can't remember a time that He didn't exist. God can't make a square circle, or an acceptable sin. This doesn't prove anything. A better definition would be, omniscience is knowing everything that can be known, and omnipotence is being able to do everything that can be done.

Or practically, if God answers prayers, then I can test that statistically. Now, you say that God refuses to be tested, but that also means that if people are sincerely praying, but someone else is measuring the effects of those prayers, that God will choose not to answer those prayers, "Sorry! I'm being tested for, so I can't help you out today." This puts the power of denying God's prayers in the hands of scientists -- ridiculous. So there's two tests for God.

Or perhaps He had sovereignly arranged for only insincere prayers or prayers outside of His will to be prayed for at that time which would give the results of the test the appearance of randomness.

This is self-fulfilling prophecy. The only reason the Jewish people came back to form a country again is because their holy book said they were entitled to do so, divine providence. Like Macbeth likely never would have become king of Scotland if he hadn't been told so by the Weird Sisters.

The Jews are historically from Israel, and there is archaeological evidence to prove this. The reason they came back to Israel is because it is historically their homeland. Given the opportunity, they would have come back to Israel with or without the bible saying they were entitled to. The point is that they were predicted to come back, not only around the date that they did, but their migration pattern was in the exact order, their currency was predicted, their economic and agricultural condition was predicted, and many other things.

I'm no biblical scholar, but I found three places where the destruction of Jerusalem is predicted. The first is in Micah 3:11-12, where it simply states that it will happen at some point. It doesn't say when, nor describe any of the circumstances. The second one I found is Daniel 9:24-26, where there's some detail that sounds kinda like Jesus, except that it was supposed to happen within 70 weeks (16 months) of when God spoke to Daniel, roughly 530 years BC. Or if you understand that the signal to begin the 70 weeks hadn't been issued yet, then Jerusalem was to have been build a mere 16 months before it was destroyed by Titus, which clearly isn't the case either. It also predicts the end will be by flood, but it was by fire, and then manual labour of soldiers, if Josephus' account is to be believed (he wasn't impartial).

The 70 weeks are not concurrent, first of all. Second, Jesus is the one who predicted the fall of Jerusalem:

Luk 19:41 And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it,
Luk 19:42 saying, "Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.
Luk 19:43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side
Luk 19:44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation."

I would have to accept Jesus as messiah before I could accept this argument. And if I had already accepted him as messiah, then the argument would be meaningless, just like the one about the universe as evidence for God's existence.

I'll rephrase this by saying, that Jesus fulfilled dozens of prophecies about the coming of the Messiah. Clearly, the impact of that Jesus has had on the world matches His claims about who He is. Consider this quotation by Napoleon:

"What a conqueror!--a conqueror who controls humanity at will, and wins to himself not only one nation, but the whole human race. What a marvel! He attaches to himself the human soul with all its energies. And how? By a miracle which surpasses all others. He claims the love of men--that is to say, the most difficult thing in the world to obtain; that which the wisest of men cannot force from his truest friend, that which no father can compel from his children, no wife from her husband, no brother from his brother--the heart. He claims it ; he requires it absolutely and undividedly, and he obtains it instantly.

Alexander, Caesar, Hannibal, Louis XIV strove in vain to secure this. They conquered the world, yet they had not a single friend, or at all events, they have none any more. Christ speaks, however, and from that moment all generations belong to him; and they are joined to him much more closely than by any ties of blood and by a much more intimate, sacred and powerful communion. He kindles the flame of love which causes one's self-love to die, and triumphs over every other love. Why should we not recognize in this miracle of love the eternal Word which created the world? The other founders of religions had not the least conception of this mystic love which forms the essence of Christianity.

I have filled multitudes with such passionate devotion that they went to death for me. But God forbid that I should compare the enthusiasm of my soldiers with Christian love. They are as unlike as their causes. In my case, my presence was always necessary, the electric effect of my glance, my voice, my words, to kindle fire in their hearts. And I certainly posses personally the secret of that magic power of taking by storm the sentiments of men; but I was not able to communicate that power to anyone. None of my generals ever learned it from me or found it out. Moreover, I myself do not possess the secret of perpetuating my name and a love for me in their hearts for ever, and to work miracles in them without material means.

Now that I languish here at St Helena, chained upon this rock, who fights, who conquers empires for me? Who still even thinks of me? Who interests himself for me in Europe? Who has remained true to me? That is the fate of all great men. It was the fate of Alexander and Caesar, as it is my own. We are forgotten, and the names of the mightiest conquerors and most illustrious emperors are soon only the subject of a schoolboy's taks. Our exploits come under the rod of a pedantic schoolmaster, who praises or condemns us as he likes.

What an abyss exists between my profound misery and the eternal reign of Christ, who is preached, loved, and worshipped, and live on throughout the entire world. Is this to die? Is it not rather to live eternally? The death of Christ! It is the death of a God."

Nope. Eternal means within all time. It implies that such an entity wouldn't necessarily exist outside of time. Maybe you meant a different word, but "eternal" doesn't describe whoever created time, if words have meaning.

Words do have meaning. Check any dictionary; the definition I used is there:

e·ter·nal/i't?rnl/
Adjective:

Lasting or existing forever; without end or beginning.
(of truths, values, or questions) Valid for all time; essentially unchanging.

What is this (especially the bits in bold) based on? It this biblical? Your intuition?

Isaiah 29:13

The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men

1 Samuel 16:7

But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart

You can give God all of the lip service you want, but He is only interested in what is in your heart.

Yes, the Lord will test your sincerity:

1 Peter 1:6-7

In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials.

These have come so that your faith--of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire--may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed.

Also, if God knows everything, then what could he possibly be "testing" for? You only need to test things if you don't already know. And if he does know, the he's just messing with my head, in which case, it's not a test.

The metaphor that is used for testing is that of impurities being refined out of gold or silver. Tests are to prove your sincerity, not necessarily what God knows.

>> ^messenger

Oh don't hate them for their race.Hate them for their Player Class--Gangsta,where anyone who figures out how to string a dozen words together in front of a microphone feels entitled to Phat Lootz,or they blame "the Man" for their failures and consider random acts of violence and theft their Just Retribution we somehow owe them. I can appreciate Good Music of any sort,and acknowledge the Art and Craft of its creating auible sculpture with sound and voice. However,I will say I can do so without buying into a whole subculture that thinks wearing your pants half off is a fashion statement. I don't see the Enya Posse in Blue Wold on their faces and sporting designer kilts running around(although we should!). To quote a line from Animal House "Stoned Drunk and Stupid is no way to go through life,son.",and that's what the subtext of the subculture amounts to. Flashy glamour is nice,but none of it matters in the face of Real Work and the instinctual Need to get it done. This seperates the Artist from the Mob,wanting to devote time away from a constant party and to physical and emotional labour to conjure something meaningful magical and new. Stepping back to admire the fruits of your handywork is a high no mass of shiney strangers can ever hope to beat. Someone in that Flashmob has orginizational skills...300 people is quite a turn out. Wouldn't it be Nice if they had much enthusiasm for something Positive,like a neighborhood watch? twittering about crimes happening to the police can help keep their neighborhoods safe,which are crawling with drugs and shoot outs."Yo Dawg! The Bruthah from that Bodega Shooting is here on Main Street!" Maybe if the "Hood wasn't such a Scarey Place,businesses would come in. And if they didn't feel it was their right to steal,they might find good jobs from the new businesses and earn a living instead of demanding one.

But one has to have Morals for that. I see none in that video. People who don't mind rampaging in front of a sea of security cameras.Can you convince such people to Play Nice at all,or past the point when doing the right thing inconveniences you?Do people sometimes need the threat of Guns even to keep civil? Suddenly snide remarks about Evolution suddenly make SENSE. But its SOcial Evolution at play here,and at fault. WE are Rome trying to convince a native of the Province they conquered to kindly not shit in the street. Sometimes you need clubs for that. But something tells me these people need their lives managed for them. Maybe wall up a ten block radius of a poor neighborhood,move all the families out nd let them play hip Hop as a live action video game where the bullets are real and cameras everywhere record the drama Live! The ultimate Reality TV Urban Experience fully packaged and ready for heavy merchendising! They can compete for resources and earn fabulous prizes,and hopefully only shoot themslves instead of the rest of us just trying to get on with life.


The Hip Hop experience...Unrated on Pay Per View.Visit our Website and Twitter your opinion on the utterly SICK way DJ Do Wah Ditty Diddy Dum Diddy Do had his ear shot off in the fight for the corner of 134th street and Avenue F! Log in with your SmartPhone and soak up all the sleeze with the HoodieCam!

It'll happen. You'll see. It's very Roman.

I commend Tommy for bringing a light-hearted attitude to his specific situation and freely releasing it upon the world for all of it's heinous viewers to watch and then succinctly or in a not so quaint way proceed to completely vent all of their life's hatred and pain and viciousness upon what he has created. That is quite the character trait that he posses. I loved this video.

@kymbos

I have my mother bringing me some slate rock from her rock garden this weekend as she comes up for Thanksgiving holiday, with that I am going to break it into proper sized pieces and join them together with the remaining marine fish safe sealant I posses. I will have a back ground of 1-2" wide 1''thick and thin, stagger them to make a rock back ground, until a month from now once its cycled I will add plants and once that's settled fish. Live plants add something more to the space, I grow plants as a hobby and have many around me, but to be able to put them in the aquarium and take use of my old hydroponic gear is very welcoming.

Added marine salt today. Sucks playing the waiting game.

>> ^mgittle:

If the bank in your latest example can't satisfy withdrawal demands, it probably borrows money from a commercial bank, which can request money from the Fed to cover the difference.

Change the word "request" to the word "borrow" and that's correct.

>> ^mgittle:
So, yes, the bank is not literally creating the money on its own, but it seems to me that banks granting loans for more money than they possess at any given time is the most significant reason for the Fed to have the ability to increase the money supply.

Again, banks aren't granting loans for more money than they posses. In the example above, they have $1,000, they can loan out $900, because they're legally required to hold 10% reserves.

Now, their balance sheet shows the following:

+$100 cash on hand as reserves
-$1000 owed to depositor
+$900 in debt owed to them by borrower
+$X in interest on debt owed to them by borrower

Which nets out to +$X interest in net worth.

There are two big risks with this arrangement:

#1: The depositor wants to close his account before the loan matures. The bank doesn't have the money to cover the withdrawl, and will need to borrow funds from another bank. If the borrowing costs are higher than the expected return from its loan, the bank is insolvent, and is gonna die. On conventional banks, the government will step in and cover the depositor's accounts up to some arbitrary dollar amount (I think it's still $250k), but the bank owners will be fired, and they'll seek out someone else to buy the bank and take over future operations.

#2: The borrower defaults on his loan. Since we're talking about only 1 depositor and 1 borrower, this single failure is the equivalent of 100% of the bank's borrowers defaulting at once. This too will result in the government stepping in, covering depositor's accounts, and restructuring the bank and selling them off.

What happened with the US financial crash was that a big, non-insured bank (Lehman Brothers) got hit by scenario #2, and since it was not a traditional, FDIC-insured bank, they just let it go bankrupt, and let the investor accounts get wiped out.

That started a panic, and led to lots of people pulling money out of other similar banks, leading to widespread cases of #1 happening, which had the effect of making banks default on loans they'd taken out with other banks, starting a new wave of #2...

That's why this system is fragile, and none of this has anything to do with monetary policy yet. This is all fiscal and regulatory policy.

What happened was that even after TARP stopped that domino effect of #2 leading to #1 leading to #2 again, banks were worried that all debt was much risker than they'd formerly believed, and so they raised the costs of borrowing (the interest rate) to sky-high levels, which severely curtailed the amount of people borrowing money to invest in real-world business activity.

That drop in investment led to a drop in production, which led to a drop in employment, which led to a drop in consumer demand, which led to a drop in production...

So now, the Fed is stepping in with monetary policy, and trying every trick in the book to stuff the banks with reserves, so they'll lower interest rates. They've had some success, but it isn't really doing the whole job, because unemployment is already so high, and consumer spending is so low, nobody wants to invest in expanding their business, no matter how cheap borrowing costs are...

That's what monetary policy is really about, stabilizing the interest rates and the overall flow of goods and services in the economy. When the economy slows, the Fed pumps money into the economy to try to make it go again. When it starts overheating (and leading to inflation), it siphons money out of the system to slow it down a bit.

Fiat currency doesn't really depend on growth -- if anything, growth depends on fiat currency, and the application of good monetary policy.

The Lenin one made him look like an Insane Clown Posse person.

And for the frenchies:
Manau - La Tribu De Dana lyrics

Le vent souffle sur les plaines de la Bretagne armoricaine,
je jette un dernier regard sur ma femme, mon fils et mon domaine.
Akim, le fils du forgeron est venu me chercher, les druides ont décidé de mener le combat dans la vallée.
Là, où tous nos ancêtres, de géants guerriers celtes, après de grandes batailles, se sont imposés en maîtres, c'est l'heure maintenant de défendre notre terre contre une armée de Simeriens prête à croiser le fer.
Toute la tribu s'est réunie autour de grands menhirs, pour invoquer les dieux afin qu'ils puissent nous bénir. Après cette prière avec mes frères sans faire état de zèle, les chefs nous ont donné à tous des gorgées d'hydromel, pour le courage, pour pas qu'il y ait de faille, pour rester grand set fiers quand nous serons dans la bataille car c'est la première fois pour moi que je pars au combat et j'espère être digne de la tribu de Dana.

REFRAIN
Dans la vallée de DAna La lilala.
Dans la vallée j'ai pu entendre les échos.
Dans la vallée de Dana La lilala.
Dans la vallée des chants de guerre près des tombeaux.

Après quelques incantations de druides et de magie, toute la tribu, le glaive en main courait vers l'ennemi, la lutte était terrible et je ne voyais que les ombres, tranchant l'ennemi qui revenait toujours en surnombre.
Mes frères tombaient l'un après l'autre devant mon regard, sous le poids des armes que possédaient tous ces barbares, des lances, des haches et des épées dans le jardin d'Eden qui écoulait du sang sur l'herbe verte de la plaine. Comme ces jours de peine où l'homme se traîne à la limite du règne du mal et de la haine, fallait-il continuer ce combat déjà perdu, mais telle était la fierté de toute la tribu, la lutte a continué comme ça jusqu'au soleil couchant, de férocité extrême en plus d'acharnement, fallait défendre la terre de nos ancêtres enterrés là et pour toutes les lois de la tribu de Dana.

REFRAIN

Au bout de la vallée on entendait le son d'une corne, d'un chef ennemi qui appelait toute sa horde, avait-il compris qu'on lutterait même en enfer et qu'à la tribu de Dana appartenaient ces terres. Les guerriers repartaient, je ne comprenais pas tout le chemin qu'ils avaient fait pour en arriver là,quand mon regard se posa tout autour de moi, j'étais le seul debout de la tribu voilà pourquoi. Mes doigts se sont écartés tout en lâchant mes arme set le long de mes joues se sont mises à couler des larmes, je n'ai jamais compris pourquoi les dieux m'ont épargné de ce jour noir de notre histoire que j'ai contée.
Le vent souffle toujours sur la Bretagne armoricaine et j'ai rejoins ma femme, mon fils et mon domaine, j'ai tout reconstruit de mes mains pour en arriver là, je suis devenu roi de la tribu de Dana.

REFRAIN

Oh, come now, @blankfist. You of all people should CHERISH the 2nd Amendment. After all, it was written expressly for the reasons you hold your personal views: to protect the people from a government saturated with power and attempting to enact complete control over its people.


Also, do you honestly believe that if we banned all guns, that criminals would no longer have them? By definition, they'd be the ONLY people to have them. Herion is illegal, but people still posses it. Larceny is illegal but people still do it. Murder is illegal but people still do it. This could go on, ad nauseum.

>> ^Psychologic:

>> ^Darkhand:
>> ^Psychologic:
If the customer can't read the listed specs himself then he probably won't do much better at an online store.

The point is when you ask someone for advice your expecting them to NOT have to read the specs.

They should have the specs of every laptop they sale memorized? Would that include benchmark numbers and compatibility issues as well?
Edit: Realistically though, if the employee can't glance at the specs for 2 seconds and then answer the question then they shouldn't be working there.


I think you're missing the point Psychologic the humor is flying over your head or you're taking everything very literally I'm not sure.

When I went to home depot a few weeks ago I was buying a lawn mower. There was an "Expert" in my isle (Just like in Best Buy if you ask someone who works in the cellphone section to sell you a computer they will say you have to get someone in the computer section).

I asked him if he could tell me the difference between two mores. He proceeded to read to me, verbatim, what was written on the little cards they put in front of boxes on the racks.

When someone comes to me and says "What's the difference between these two" and you have to read off the cards, and then you can't formulate an opinion of your own such as the gentle ginger pictures in this video, it's obvious you have no business selling anything in that department.

If he has to read the specs that intently then he obviously is going to look at you and say "Well this one has more gigabytes then the other" Wow great fucking insight Sherlock like I couldn't figure that out by myself when I READ THE STICKER. Like these "sales people" posses some sort of Arcane Knowledge about the English Language that enables them to find some sort of Davinci Code within the Best Buy Sticker.

Plain and simple if you can only tell me the difference by checking what's on each sticker and then NOTHING MORE you're doing a BAD JOB.

You see hollywood, no method acting was required. The dog did not have to go out and "Research" what it was like growing up as a farm hand in the old west. When posse of cattle rustlers shoot you down .. and then leave a doggy treat in your mouth ...Wait, nevermind.

Bravo.

"Yes and the gullible hoards are once again captivated by the Royal Inbred Posse as they step out onto the veranda at Buckingham Palace en-masse. The prince, now Duke of Cambridge (whatever the fuck that means), wore the red tunic of an Irish Guards colonel (a title of which he would only be able to aspire to should he ever have had to work a day in his life), and his lovely wife and now "duchess of "who-gives-a-whiff" Kate "Commoner" Middleton, have planned a week of celebrations which will cost roughly the same as the GDP of Bolivia."

"Moron these stories as we develop new ways of diverting attention from the fact that we are waggling you in the bottom while we continue our plans to destroy the planet prior to implementing mass genocide, after these messages from your controlers.
Consciousness will return, after gentle massages."

if you already discount the spirit as being non-existent and have never experienced the mental health system then this video will really not hold anything of interest for you.

i find this young mans approach to dealing with mental illness a very humanistic one and while you may feel the numbers may be fudged to make his point...big deal.are you denying the RAMPANT diagnosis in the industrialized world concerning bi-polar?panic-anxiety? this list is becoming LEGION..everyone seems to be all fucked sideways mentally.
and the answer to all this mental health calamity is?........
medicate baby!!
create a society of utter zombies.

and who doesn't take favorable numbers or statistics to make their argument?
or base a philosophy partially on the words and teachings of another?
ken wilbur practically stole from teilhard de chardin and so what of it...not a big deal.

bi-polar is just failed indoctrination manifesting itself as a polarized polemic of what we have been taught how we are SUPPOSED to be and NOT who we actually are.
there are many ways to deal with this.
some self-medicate,others are medicated and then there are those that choose the path this man chose.

i do not agree with everything this young man put forth but i do agree with the humanistic approach:
know what you want.
to do that you have to know who you are and to do THAT you have to have the courage to look at yourself clearly,openly and honestly (much harder than it sounds).
this is when you realize that maybe...just maybe..you were living your life not according to what YOU wanted but rather what OTHERS wanted for you (mom,dad,grandma,girlfriend..you get the idea).
does this solve everything?
of course not but it is a good place to start and notice not one mention of spirit nor any new age jargon.

now self-medication and prescribed medication to me are just band aids without addressing the real problem and BOTH have long lasting side effects that are not of the positive kind.
i dont need to list those do i?

see what im saying here?
i see you tearing apart somebody elses work but did not see you post any solutions.
i mean look at this one line in your post:
"At the beginning, he posses the question, why can't mainstream psychology and psychiatry heal bi-polar disorder. The answer is because we don't understand exactly what it is, just that it tends to happen."
you wrote that and it didnt give you pause for a second?
they over-diagnose something that they dont know what it really is.
how the fuck can you ever be expected to heal something you dont really know anything about but the REAL question is:why the fuck are you even diagnosing people with something you dont really know anything about?

am i the only one seeing insanity all over that?
thats just fucking crazy.

Ugh, he doesn't understand evolution at all... He keeps saying things like "During a certain part of evolution...", it's pathetic how newage-y non-sense likes to attach scientific sounding terms in attempt to legitimize their ideas.

At the beginning, he posses the question, why can't mainstream psychology and psychiatry heal bi-polar disorder. The answer is because we don't understand exactly what it is, just that it tends to happen.

Plus, I can almost guarantee that the 'statistic' that bi-polar disorder had gone up 4000% percent in 10 years two decades ago is a exercise in both failing to correct for clustering and misrepresenting the data. Read one book on how statistics can be easily manipulated to support your bias and a number like 4000% immediately becomes highly suspect thus making the assumption behind his belief also suspect.

Spiral dynamics is little more than a rehashed "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs" which has been found to be useless as a way of measuring people.

I didn't downvote the original, but now I gotta downvote this one.

Time to call in The Women, though, if you are calling in your posse (posse, jiggy, who the heck do I think I'm kidding?)

So I haven't discussed this with any of these amazing women....

But a scientific experiment has been in progress on this, to quote @Fusionaut, foul video.

We need some downvotes to show these guys that Women Can Roar around here, too!

@Lann, @Issykitty, @peggedbea, @AdrianBlack, @MikesHL13, @inflatablevagina, @taranimator

And then there are the men who I know love women.... (the guys upvoting this vid love women, too, I know... this is just for fun)

@BoneRemake has already chimed in, @kymbos, @dystopianfuturetoday, @radx

It's a downvote party!

So given that this is the vid I didn't want anyone to see, I have now called all these people to see it.

By definition, you win, Gwiz!