People think they can know God, or what he's up to. That's quite laughable.

You can't explain how or where consciousness came from. You have no idea, just as the average person can not know God. And if you knew God, you couldn't explain it.

Even a relatively superficial exploration would help you out, but your cup is quite full.

If you could answer the question honestly 'where did our morality come from' (and it didn't come from us) then you would be on your way.

But... but I already enrolled in his 12 week course "horseback archery on foot." And what do I do about this LARS tattoo? I just don't think my friends will ever take me seriously again after I invested so much in Lars.

Goddamn you, Lars, you fucking piece of shit I hope you choke on piss and DIE. My whole goddamn life is a whore-mongering lie, imagined as the solipsistic plunge of a physically and mentally inferior charlatan in a shitty and superficial world, but which is more likely the dying thoughts of a misshapen and misfiring synapse in a soup of decaying matter once thought alive.

Hey kceaton1,

I'm sorry to hear about the narcolepsy and sleep paralysis. I remember watching a video someone put out recently (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PuvXpv0yDM) that sort of explained what it is like and it didn't seem like very much fun. I can't really imagine what you're going through. I have a friend who has narcolepsy but it must be a mild version because it seems like she kind of winds up to it and comes out of it pretty easy.

In regards to your question, I appreciate you not writing off my response as one thing or another. In regards to supernatural experiences, I can see why you have a lot of skepticism as well. You have experienced things on the order of what you've heard other people call supernatural experiences, but you have a natural explanation for them.

Having a supernatural experience can be hard to quantify, and usually when God is revealing something to you, it goes beyond sense impressions. You could perhaps write some of them off as one thing or another but three experiences in particular stand out to me as being undeniable. They aren't necessary what led me to Christ but they really defy any kind of naturalistic explanation.

The first was from before I was a Christian, when I was into the new age. At the time I was exploring a lot of eastern spiritual practices. There is one in particular, which I wont go into detail about, that for a few minutes allowed me to see with my eyes closed. When I was in the shower one day I closed my eyes to rinse my hair and when I did I was utterly shocked and amazed to be looking right at my feet and the water falling down upon them. It was real time and the only difference from normal vision was it had kind of an energetic haze over everything, kind of matrix looking. It was otherworldly but still completely in sync with my normal vision when I opened my eyes.

I wasn't hallucinating because I was able to test it in real time by opening and closing my eyes and looking at various things. It was all completely consistent and completely real. I could see what was going on to minute detail with my eyes closed and when I opened them everything matched perfectly, and vice versa. I wasn't dreaming because I immediately got out of the shower and told my then significant other who would vouch for that happening. It didn't last long but I did experience it and there isn't a naturalistic explanation.

The second thing that happened to me is that is undeniable is that I was physically healed by a Christian praying over me. My left leg used to be shorter than my right leg by a quarter inch. I know this because I measured it a few times and it caused me to walk somewhat unevenly. The man prayed for someone else who had the same problem except worse, and I saw their leg grow out and even up with the other. When I saw that I asked to be prayed for and the same thing happened to me. I know it did because I measured my legs and they are exactly the same length. I also had to learn how to walk correctly after this happened. Again, no naturalistic explanation.

The third thing happened at my baptism. I knew I needed to get baptized, although at the time I didn't really understand what it was all about. When I got baptized, it completely changed me. The easiest way to described it is, when I went into the water I was one person, and when I came back up I was a different person. Different in this sense, that I was cleansed on the inside. Emotionally and spiritually, it was like a thick black sludge had been removed from the walls of my heart. An emotional weight had been lifted, depression and anger and sadness disappeared; it was replaced with an incredible lightness, with true peace and joy. This wasn't superficial; I was utterly changed. I was a different and better (healed)person, and on top of that I could sense the tangible presence of the Holy Spirit, from that moment on until now.

People have given me different explanations; hallucinations, psychotic break, etc. I've have a lot of experience with people who have mental illness; the things that happen to them aren't positive, they're negative. When they think they have entered Nirvana, their behavior is completely off and often self-destructive. Delusional psychosis doesn't heal, it hurts. One way or another, the whole thing is going to unravel because it isn't real. What has happened to me is very real and I experience Gods love, care and guidance every day of my life. The Lord is good, and He is faithful; He cares even about the little things of my life.

I am a Christian not simply because I have seen miracles, it is because I believe the gospel. I know I am a sinner and that I need a Savior. I know that Savior is the Lord Jesus Christ, who died for my sins and was raised to life on the third day. The Lord has made that clear to me and I don't have any trouble agreeing with Him. He gave it all for me; why should I do any less? Before I knew the Lord I was resigned to a meaningless death. Today, I have a living hope. But I didn't come to be a Christian because I am afraid of death. I came to be a Christian because God revealed Himself to me, that He created me for a reason, and that my true fulfillment and purpose can only be found in Him. Since I have given my life to Jesus Christ, I have found that to be completely true, in ways I could never have imagined. My life affirms the truth of this scripture:

Ephesians 3:20 Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us,
Ephesians 3:21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, forever. Amen.

Not much of a "making of" as much as a "superficial developer interview for publicity".

Jesus, your ignorance beggars belief.

I don't understand why she doesn't ...wear earbuds???

Let's forget the drone bombings of entire cities, etc

The path to empowering women is not by disempowering men.

While many feminist campaigns and viral videos are great at expressing the (superficial) problem, they're not helping to solve it.

I don't understand why she doesn't do what most women (and men) who don't want to be approached (be it by men, women, panhandlers, whomever!) while walking through a city do, and wear earbuds??? It's a very simple solution and provides an easy and practical way of ignoring most of these attempts (if not dissuading them altogether).

Also.. This.

And:
"Let's all stop and focus our attention on "catcalling" women. Let's forget the drone bombings of entire cities, the fact that the US has 900 military bases in over 153 countries, the fact that you are almost 9 times more likely to be killed by a police employee than a terrorist....let's take a break from that and focus on the fact that sometimes men are creepy to pretty women."


And:

"The path to empowering women is not by disempowering men.
While many feminist campaigns and viral videos are great at expressing the (superficial) problem, they're not helping to solve it. Prolonging the "battle of the sexes" and "blame game" mentality will never stop rape, harassment, or abuse. All that's being done is expressing pain and anger, which is fine, unless it's directed at another. Attacking men for attacking women isn't going to solve anything.
We need to go so much deeper than this. So much deeper.
We don't need to see more proof of "how fucked up society is"; this only propagates stereotypes that induce resentment and fear. We need to see the power of compassion, love, forgiveness, healing, empathy, and acceptance between both sexes. We need to learn why people hurt other people (hint: it's because they're hurting themselves) and how to heal it and empathize with it.
We need women to open up and love in the face of men approaching, not shut down and run away. We need men to open up and love in the face of rejection, rather than becoming bitter or forcing our will upon another.
Unabashedly, I do not support or promote campaigns that are based in pain, resentment, anger, or fear, no matter how noble the cause. I wish to lift up both sexes – nay, all people – without perpetuating the pain and conflict.
This darkness has been illuminated out in the world, now it's time to illuminate the darkness within ourselves and heal it. What we see out in our culture is a reflection of how so many of us are unable to resolve the conflicts, rejection, and hurt caused by the masculine and feminine inside of us. We can not fix this by signing new laws or going out and trying to control everybody; we do this by starting the forgiveness and healing process within ourselves and going out into the world shining love instead of hate."

Promotion of his book is all fine and dandy, but if Russell keeps trying to squeeze this much content into such short and superficial interviews, he's going to need more meditation if he doesn't want to have a stroke on air...

Actually after thinking about it more, she was the was drooling over the shirtless guy right from the start. Seems superficial and a bit hypocritical to me.

Yeah, I agree exactly. As a somewhat related example, I just finished reading Anathem by Neal Stephenson. In truth, it could actually make a pretty interesting and exciting sci-fi film, but it would lose virtually everything that made it a good novel (for the most part, Stephenson can get a little self-indulgent in his dialog). If you took the roughly 1000 page long book, and stripped out everything you couldn't put in a film without it becoming extraordinarily long and tedious, you'd maybe be left with about 150 pages. It could be a great film, and it would fit the three act motif, but it just wouldn't be Anathem.

That's sort of what led me to think of Neuromancer. There's lots of good, heady sci-fi there, but it's all expressed in events, action, and good but concise dialog (and there are, quite distinctly, three acts). Like all adaptations, sure some things would be lost, but the important concepts would still be there. Anathem, on the other hand, would just be a superficial event-driven story. Similarly, Snow Crash would just come across as ridiculous (though I'd be interested to see what Terry Gilliam could do with it).

I feel like the current crop of superhero flicks are sacrificing too much in the way of character development for spectacle and more characters. I was honestly surprised by the reception to The Avengers as it felt like it could have been directed by Michael Bay. I suppose it's too much to wish for more superhero movies in the style of Watchmen, particularly given how badly it did.

I thought CA:TWS had some good set piece scenes, but ultimately fell into the same camp (threadbare plot! more under-developed characters! more explosions!). The deeper themes I saw some reviewers vouch for (surveillance vs. security) seemed horribly superficial.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/12/12/scientists-discover-double-meaning-in-genetic-code/

DNA is more sophisticated than any code we have ever developed, and that is understating the case. It has a language, grammatical syntax, error correction, vocabulary and meaning. If you read the article you will see that scientists were stunned to find a hidden code operating within the code. Even a superficial understanding of DNA is enough to see that it is not by any means "primitive" but actually it is advanced beyond our capability to understand it.

That isn't the argument though, that DNA is sophisticated, which it is. The argument is that the information in DNA is proof of design. What that design is intended to do is another question. You may look at certain features and say, here is a terrible design, simply because you don't understand the intentions of the designer. Only a super-intellect could have designed DNA, and I don't think that is going out on a limb by any means.

Anyone who thinks the phrase "Throw like a girl" is an insult to girls has entirely missed the point.

Take a look at professional male versus female ballet dancers. The biological differences are quite plain to see. Generally speaking women move in a more graceful manner than men (it's one of the many reasons why we are attracted to women). These biological differences in movement, thought, behaviour, strength etc are what sets us apart. It's a plus that they're made that way.

Saying "You throw like a girl" is not an insult to women. The meaning isn't "You're inferior, like women". The phrase is an insult to a fellow male, quite simply saying "you're not as strong or masculine" as I am. It's the same as saying to a guy, "you dance like a girl". We love the way girls dance, but to say that to a fellow guy is an insult to them, not to women. As childish as it may seem, that's what we do. We compete with one another on that superficial level. It's a simple yet important difference in understanding what the intention of the phrase is.

It's a clever rationalization of hypocrisy. If it's going to be taboo to observe patterns in groups of people demarcated by visible characteristics they were born with, be consistent about it. But I'd argue against that taboo.

What makes racism bad is treating people as specimens of a group rather than unique individuals. Group averages may differ slightly but there's tons of overlap. Common usage of the word "racism" unfortunately conflates a moral aspect (how to treat people) with an epistemological aspect (dogma that all groups are created exactly equal in every way). Epistemology shouldn't be moralized. I could give you lots of examples of sociological and psychological research getting muddled on account of an inflexible dogma that there couldn't be any heritable differences between groups other than the obvious superficial ones. I'd rather conceive of the word racism as a verb describing harmful actions towards people due to their group membership, not a noun denoting a thoughtcrime or speechcrime. Like church and state, or science and religion, epistemology and morality don't go together.

A priori based on generation times and mutation rates you should expect there could be 1/10 as much variation between historically isolated groups of humans as there is between breeds of dogs, since the most recent common ancestor of all domestic dogs is half as far back as humans' most recent common ancestor is (or rather was before 16th and 17th century explorers spread their sperm across the globe) but dogs breed a lot faster. Breeds of dogs demonstrably vary in many behavioral and psychological traits. It's not far fetched to suppose that a variety of environments over the past 100,000 years of humanity pushed population means of behavioral traits in various directions.

Well, the truck is a truly terrible idea (*under* the truck might be the best of bad alternatives). Perhaps we need to go down the "there ought to be a law" route and mandate that the owners of trailer communities provide a tornado shelters. They can't be that expensive to build.... a hole in the ground, some cinderblocks, some steel I-beams.

Here's a question for the experts. If, for some reason, you're stuck in your truck. Are you better off with the windows rolled down, partially down? Fully up?

My very superficial understanding leads me to suspect that if the windows are closed, you're risking the pressure differential exploding them. On the other hand, they will protect you from a lot of flying debris (to an extent) if they are closed. Maybe partially closed?

I guess when it's all said and done, it's EIA. If you live in a tornado prone part of the world, and you live in a trailer park, you should probably have some sort of plan worked out in advance regarding the best course of action.

May be simply a matter of beauty being as always, residing in the eye of the beholder there newtboy, and that the ugly or judgmental aspects of one's personal preference lurks as some superficial and systemic admission of a personal failing with regard to people in whatever capacity they find themselves in through the necessity of of their chosen profession.

Besides my personal disdain for such a flippant and overtly less than laughable comment, try and find this "five dollar hoe" you speak of anywhere in Berlin besides at some used gardening supply store or estate sale.